ArticleJournal of pediatric psychology2025
Stigma in differences of sex development: a scoping review.
Article in Journal of pediatric psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differences in sex development: Taking inventory of function and anatomy to empower self care.Seminars in pediatric surgery · 2025Review
- Stigma in differences of sex development: a scoping review.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveDifferences of sex development (DSD) affect somatic sex determination and differentiation and are associated with stigmatization risks. This scoping review evaluated reports of stigma experiences described by individuals with DSD, caregivers of individuals with DSD, and non-affected individuals (e.g., laypeople).
methodsA multi-step, iterative process was used for the search strategy. Databases utilized included Cochrane Library, PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE (Ovid MEDLINE(R) and Epub Ahead of Print, In-process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Daily and Versions(R)), Embase (Elsevier), CINAHL Complete (EBSCO), PsychInfo (EBSCO), LGBT Life (EBSCO), and Scopus (Elsevier). Peer-reviewed, English language, quantitative or qualitative studies that evaluated stigma or stigma-related attitudes toward individuals with DSD published from 1955 through August 2024 were included. Stigma was categorized as felt (feared rejection), enacted (bullying), or systemic/structural (e.g., institutionalized policies).
resultsSearches yielded 6,892 articles after eliminating duplicates. Following full-text screening, 206 articles were included in the review indicating that DSD-specific stigma was measured. However, measuring stigma was a specific study aim in a minority of publications (51 articles, 25%), with evidence for felt (164 articles, 80%), enacted (127 articles, 62%), and structural/systemic stigma (70 articles, 34%) reported across informants and DSD diagnosis. Few studies utilized validated DSD-specific stigma measures.
conclusionsStigma is commonly reported in the literature across the spectrum of DSD conditions but is rarely measured. Stigma was predominantly assessed using open-ended questions, with limited use of validated measures. Results have implications for clinical care, including stigma-related screening and intervention and the need for future research using standardized stigma assessments.
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.