Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40143991›Full record

ArticleCurrent pediatrics reports2024

A Narrative Synthesis Review of Legislation Banning Gender-Affirming Care.

Jessie Melina Garcia Gutiérrez, Emerson Dusic, Audren J K Bambilla, Arjee Javellana Restar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current pediatrics reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jessie Melina Garcia GutiérrezDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA.
Emerson DusicInstitute for Public Health Genetics, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA.
Audren J K BambillaDepartment of Health Systems and Population Health, University of Washington School of Public Health, Seattle, WA, USA.
Arjee Javellana RestarDepartment of Behavioral and Social Sciences, Yale University School of Public Health, New Haven, CT, USA.

Funding

Research Education Institute for Dynamic Scholars (REIDS)R25MH087217 · NIMH · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Jasmine Abrams, Trace S Kershaw · 2010 to 2026
$3.9M
AHRQ HHS T32 HS013853NIMH NIH HHS R25 MH087217
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose of Review: In recent years, there has been a drastic increase in legislation across US states that aims to ban gender-affirming care (GAC) for transgender and nonbinary (trans) youth. We synthesized the literature on bans on GAC, its impacts on medical and mental health providers, trans communities, particularly trans youth and their caregivers (e.g., parents/families), and provided recommendations for future research and advocacy. Recent Findings: We highlight several adverse impacts of legislation banning GAC, including: an increase in professional tensions for medical and mental health providers that work with trans youth and worse mental health outcomes for trans youth and their caregivers due to loss of autonomy in accessing evidence-based GAC. Summary: Bans on GAC undermine evidenced-based practices and are resulting in negative health effects for trans communities and youth. Research evidence highlights the need to examine effects of bans at the intersections of gender identity, socioeconomic status, race, and ethnicity.

Indexed as

Gender affirmationGender-affirming healthcareLegislation bansMental healthNonbinaryTransgender

Identifiers

PMID40143991
PMCPMC11935454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.