SynthesisBMJ open2025
Outcome measurement for gender-affirming care in Canada: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionGender-affirming care (GAC) includes interventions aimed at supporting an individual's gender identity. Canada is experiencing an increase in referrals for GAC, higher than any other health service; therefore, there is a need for a systematic approach to health outcome measurement to effectively evaluate care. This review aims to analyse health outcome measurement in Canadian GAC, focusing on what is measured, how it is measured and associated barriers and enablers.
methodsA comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus and CINAHL, up to 26 December 2023. Inclusion criteria were original articles involving transgender or gender-diverse (TGD) patients receiving gender-affirming care in Canada.
resultsA total of 4649 articles were identified with 64 included, representing 6561 TGD patients. Most studies were conducted in Ontario (52%), British Columbia (19%) and Quebec (11%). The most common forms of GAC provided were hormonal (36%) and surgical (27%). Barriers to outcome measurement include that most studies (61%) did not use patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). When PROMs were used, most did not capture gender-related constructs (eg, gender dysphoria). Barriers to accessing care included stigma, discrimination, lack of clinician knowledge, geographic, socioeconomic and institutional barriers.
conclusionThis review reveals gaps in outcome measurement for GAC, particularly underutilisation of PROMs and inconsistent outcome measurement and reporting. There is a need to systematically implement PROMs, including those measuring gender-related constructs, to promote patient-centred care. This review provides evidence-based recommendations for improving health outcomes for TGD individuals in Canada.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.