Talk:Gender transition
<templatestyles src="Module:Message box/tmbox.css"/><templatestyles src="Talk header/styles.css" />
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gender transition Template:Pagetype. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Template:Find sources |
| Archives: Template:Comma separated entries<templatestyles src="Template:Tooltip/styles.css" />Auto-archiving periodScript error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".: Template:Human readable duration File:Information icon4.svg |
| Template:Search box |
Script error: No such module "Check for unknown parameters".Script error: No such module "Check for deprecated parameters".
Template:Contentious topics/talk notice Template:WikiProject banner shell User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn User:MiszaBot/config Template:Annual readership Template:Section sizes Template:Old move
Wiki Education assignment: Psychology of Gender
Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment
— Assignment last updated by Zisha68 (talk) 02:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Page issues
There needs to be more of an idea on this page's identity I think. In addition: some parts of the page repeat almost verbatim (my fault, but it seemed better than the alternative of withholding detail in certain places), needs more neutral detail on detransitions, non-binary identity and transitioning as a non-binary person, and maybe more consensus on how this page is written? (what terms we use, etc.). I think I'm probably a bit too close to the page to help with some of these things, but I'll continue to improve the page however I can, whenever I am able. However, in its current state, I hope improvement is seen across the board!!
bluhhh signing off for the night JDBauby (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Statement in the lead
In the lead:
This statement is surprisingly affirmative compared to the study that was used as reference (italics added for emphasis):
Maybe someone can add another source to support the claim? Preferably, a high-quality systematic review or meta-analysis with strong evidence.
Or simply reword the sentence according to the source?
Sincerely, DiscipulusVirtutis (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
- This particular review says it could not draw any conclusions about death by suicide, probably because it only reviewed one study that assessed suicide. The review does conclude that ‘Hormone therapy was associated with increased QOL, decreased depression, and decreased anxiety’. That said, I agree that further sources are needed to justify a firm claim of effectiveness. I’ve added three more literature reviews of 29, 31, and 58 studies that all conclude gender transition improves or significantly improves mental health, as well as statements from the American Psychological Association and World Medical Association to back up the claim that it's a recommended treatment.
- More broadly, I think it's important to keep in mind that the goal of this page is not to accurately represent the limitations of one source, but the overall state of the evidence. In this case, there's plentiful evidence of a broad medical consensus on the efficacy of gender transition, and the language should reflect that. The revision 'It is a treatment for individuals experiencing gender dysphoria, with evidence suggesting potential mental health benefits, though further research is needed' frames the issue as far more uncertain than it really is, so I've reverted the change, with additional citations.