ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: National and international guidelines recommend that psychosocial support should be a key component of the care offered to children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. However, specific approaches or interventions are not recommended. AIM: To identify and summarise evidence on the outcomes of psychosocial support interventions for children and adolescents (age 0-18) experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Database searches (MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL; PsycINFO; Web of Science) were performed in April 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles reporting the results of studies measuring outcomes of psychosocial support interventions were included. Quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. Half were conducted in the US, with others from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK. Six were pre-post analyses or cohort studies, three were mixed methods, and one was a secondary analysis of intervention data from four trials. Most studies were of low quality. Most analyses of mental health and psychosocial outcomes showed either benefit or no change, with none indicating negative or adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: The small number of low-quality studies limits conclusions about the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for children/adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. Clarity on the intervention approach as well as the core outcomes would support the future aggregation of evidence. More robust methodology and reporting is required. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children/adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services. Services and practice guidelines are responding to these changes. AIM: This systematic review examines the numbers and characteristics of children/adolescents (under 18) referred to specialist gender or endocrinology services. METHODS: Database searches were performed (April 2022), with results assessed independently by two reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles providing at least birth-registered sex or age at referral were included. Demographic, gender-related, mental health, neurodevelopmental conditions and adverse childhood experience data were extracted. A narrative approach to synthesis was used and where appropriate proportions were combined in a meta-analysis. RESULTS: 143 studies from 131 articles across 17 countries were included. There was a twofold to threefold increase in the number of referrals and a steady increase in birth-registered females being referred. There is inconsistent collection and reporting of key data across many of the studies. Approximately 60% of children/adolescents referred to services had made steps to present themselves in their preferred gender. Just under 50% of studies reported data on depression and/or anxiety and under 20% reported data on other mental health issues and neurodevelopmental conditions. Changes in the characteristics of referrals over time were generally not reported. CONCLUSIONS: Services need to capture, assess and respond to the potentially co-occurring complexities of children/adolescents being referred to specialist gender and endocrine services. Agreement on the core characteristics for collection at referral/assessment would help to ensure services are capturing data as well as developing pathways to meet the needs of these children.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021289659.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Treatment to suppress or lessen effects of puberty are outlined in clinical guidelines for adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. Robust evidence concerning risks and benefits is lacking and there is a need to aggregate evidence as new studies are published. AIM: To identify and synthesise studies assessing the outcomes of puberty suppression in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Database searches (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were performed in April 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. An adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies was used to appraise study quality. Only moderate-quality and high-quality studies were synthesised. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses reporting guidelines were used. RESULTS: 11 cohort, 8 cross-sectional and 31 pre-post studies were included (n=50). One cross-sectional study was high quality, 25 studies were moderate quality (including 5 cohort studies) and 24 were low quality. Synthesis of moderate-quality and high-quality studies showed consistent evidence demonstrating efficacy for suppressing puberty. Height increased in multiple studies, although not in line with expected growth. Multiple studies reported reductions in bone density during treatment. Limited and/or inconsistent evidence was found in relation to gender dysphoria, psychological and psychosocial health, body satisfaction, cardiometabolic risk, cognitive development and fertility. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of high-quality research assessing puberty suppression in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. No conclusions can be drawn about the impact on gender dysphoria, mental and psychosocial health or cognitive development. Bone health and height may be compromised during treatment. More recent studies published since April 2022 until January 2024 also support the conclusions of this review. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services. There are various guidelines outlining approaches to the clinical care of these children and adolescents. AIM: To examine the quality and development of published guidelines or clinical guidance containing recommendations for managing gender dysphoria/incongruence in children and/or adolescents (age 0-18). A separate paper reports the synthesis of guideline recommendations. METHODS: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were searched to April 2022 and web-based searches and contact with international experts continued to December 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation tool was used to examine guideline quality. RESULTS: Twenty-three guidelines/clinical guidance publications (1998-2022) were identified (4 international, 3 regional and 16 national). The quality and methods reporting in these varied considerably. Few guidelines systematically reviewed empirical evidence, and links between evidence and recommendations were often unclear. Although most consulted with relevant stakeholders, including 10 which involved service users or user representatives, it was often unclear how this influenced recommendations and only two reported including children/adolescents and/or parents. Guidelines also lacked clarity about implementation. Two international guidelines (World Professional Association for Transgender Health and Endocrine Society) formed the basis for most other guidance, influencing their development and recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Most clinical guidance for managing children/adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence lacks an independent and evidence-based approach and information about how recommendations were developed. This should be considered when using these to inform service development and clinical practice. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Over the last 10-15 years, there has been an increase in the number of children and adolescents referred to gender services, particularly among adolescent birth-registered females. This population shows a higher prevalence of co-occurring mental health difficulties and neurodevelopmental conditions. Some countries have recently restricted access to medical treatments in recognition of the uncertain evidence base. AIM: To understand the current provision of gender services for children and adolescents across the EU-15+ countries that have comparable high-income healthcare systems, to inform service development in the UK. METHODS: An e-survey of paediatric gender services was conducted between September 2022 and April 2023. It covered service structure, care pathways, interventions and data collection. Data were described and compared to identify similarities and differences among participating services. RESULTS: 15 services in eight countries (Australia, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Northern Ireland, The Netherlands, Spain and Finland) responded. While a multidisciplinary team was present in all services, its composition and organisation varied. Clinical practice was informed by international guidelines, with four countries following their own national guidelines. Differences were observed in referral criteria, care pathways for prepubertal children and those with co-occurring conditions. Eligibility criteria for medical interventions also varied. Psychosocial support and interventions were limited, and outcome data collection was scarce. CONCLUSIONS: This survey revealed both similarities and key variations in the clinical practice of paediatric gender services across eight different countries. The study emphasises the need for service development that both considers the management of co-occurring conditions and embeds routine data collection in practice.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services. However, little is currently known about the proportions accessing different types of care and treatment following referral. AIM: This systematic review examines the range of care pathways of children/adolescents (under 18) referred to specialist gender or endocrinology services. METHODS: Database searches were performed (April 2022), with results assessed independently by two reviewers. Peer-reviewed articles providing data for numbers of children and/or adolescents at referral/assessment and their treatment pathways were included. A narrative approach to synthesis was used and where appropriate proportions were combined in a random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: 23 studies across nine countries were included, representing 6133 children and/or adolescents with a median age at assessment of 14-16 and overall a higher percentage of birth-registered females. Of those assessed, 36% (95% CI 27% to 45%) received puberty suppression, 51% (95% CI 40% to 62%) received masculinising or feminising hormones, 68% (95% CI 57% to 77%) received puberty suppression and/or hormones and 16% (95% CI 10% to 24%) received surgery. No study systematically reported information about the full pathway or psychological care received by children/adolescents. Follow-up in many studies was insufficient or unclear. Reasons for discontinuation were rarely provided. CONCLUSIONS: Prospective studies with long-term follow-up reporting information about the full range of pathways are needed to understand what happens to children and adolescents referred to specialist gender services. Information about provision of psychological care is needed considering high rates of psychosocial difficulties in this population.PROSPERO registration number CRD42021289659.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services and there are various published guidelines outlining approaches to clinical care. AIM: To examine the recommendations about the management of children and/or adolescents (age 0-18) experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence in published guidelines or clinical guidance. A separate paper examines the quality and development of guidelines. METHODS: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. Databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were searched to April 2022 and web-based searches and contact with international experts continued to December 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation tool was used to examine guideline quality. RESULTS: 23 guidelines/clinical guidance publications (1998-2022) were identified (4 international, 3 regional, 16 national). Guidelines describe a similar care pathway starting with psychosocial care for prepubertal children, puberty suppressants followed by hormones for eligible adolescents and surgical interventions as these adolescents enter adulthood. In general, there is consensus that adolescents should receive a multidisciplinary assessment, although clear guidance about the purpose or approach is lacking. There are differing recommendations about when and on what basis psychological and medical interventions should be offered. There is limited guidance about what psychological care should be provided, about the management of prepubertal children or those with a non-binary gender identity, nor about pathways between specialist gender services and other providers. CONCLUSIONS: Published guidance describes a similar care pathway; however, there is no current consensus about the purpose and process of assessment for children or adolescents with gender dysphoria/incongruence, or about when psychological or hormonal interventions should be offered and on what basis. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines outline the use of hormones for masculinisation/feminisation in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence. Robust evidence concerning risks and benefits is lacking. There is a need to aggregate evidence as research becomes available. AIM: Identify and synthesise studies assessing the outcomes of hormones for masculinisation/feminisation in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: Systematic review and narrative synthesis. Database searches (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were performed in April 2022, with results assessed independently by two reviewers. An adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for Cohort Studies was used to assess study quality. Moderate- and high-quality studies were synthesised. RESULTS: 12 cohort, 9 cross-sectional and 32 pre-post studies were included (n=53). One cohort study was high-quality. Other studies were moderate (n=33) and low-quality (n=19). Synthesis of high and moderate-quality studies showed consistent evidence demonstrating induction of puberty, although with varying feminising/masculinising effects. There was limited evidence regarding gender dysphoria, body satisfaction, psychosocial and cognitive outcomes, and fertility. Evidence from mainly pre-post studies with 12-month follow-up showed improvements in psychological outcomes. Inconsistent results were observed for height/growth, bone health and cardiometabolic effects. Most studies included adolescents who received puberty suppression, making it difficult to determine the effects of hormones alone. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of high-quality research assessing the use of hormones in adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. Moderate-quality evidence suggests mental health may be improved during treatment, but robust study is still required. For other outcomes, no conclusions can be drawn. More recent studies published since April 2022 until January 2024 also support the conclusions of this review.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021289659.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria or incongruence are being referred to specialist gender services. Historically, social transitioning prior to assessment was rare but it is becoming more common. AIM: To identify and synthesise studies assessing the outcomes of social transition for children and adolescents (under 18) experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence. METHODS: A systematic review and narrative sythesis. Database searches (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science) were perfomed in April 2022. Studies reporting any outcome of social transition (full or partial) for children and adolescents experiencing gender dysphoria/incongruence were included. An adapted version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies was used to appraise study quality. RESULTS: Eleven studies were included (children (n=8) and adolescents (n=3)) and most were of low quality. The majority were from the US, featured community samples and cross-sectional analyses. Different comparator groups were used, and outcomes related to mental health and gender identity reported. Overall studies consistently reported no difference in mental health outcomes for children who socially transitioned across all comparators. Studies found mixed evidence for adolescents who socially transitioned. CONCLUSIONS: It is difficult to assess the impact of social transition on children/adolescents due to the small volume and low quality of research in this area. Importantly, there are no prospective longitudinal studies with appropriate comparator groups assessing the impact of social transition on mental health or gender-related outcomes for children/adolescents. Professionals working in the area of gender identity and those seeking support should be aware of the absence of robust evidence of the benefits or harms of social transition for children and adolescents. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021289659.
ABSTRACT
Background: Randomised controlled trials ('trials') are susceptible to poor participant recruitment and retention. Studies Within A Trial are the strongest methods for testing the effectiveness of strategies to improve recruitment and retention. However, relatively few of these have been conducted. Objectives: PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial aimed to facilitate at least 25 Studies Within A Trial evaluating recruitment or retention strategies. We share our experience of delivering the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme, and the lessons learnt for undertaking randomised Studies Within A Trial. Design: A network of 10 Clinical Trials Units and 1 primary care research centre committed to conducting randomised controlled Studies Within A Trial of recruitment and/or retention strategies was established. Promising recruitment and retention strategies were identified from various sources including Cochrane systematic reviews, the Study Within A Trial Repository, and existing prioritisation exercises, which were reviewed by patient and public members to create an initial priority list of seven recruitment and eight retention interventions. Host trial teams could apply for funding and receive support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to undertake Studies Within A Trial. We also tested the feasibility of undertaking co-ordinated Studies Within A Trial, across multiple host trials simultaneously. Setting: Clinical trials unit-based trials recruiting or following up participants in any setting in the United Kingdom were eligible. Participants: Clinical trials unit-based teams undertaking trials in any clinical context in the United Kingdom. Interventions: Funding of up to £5000 and support from the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial team to design, implement and report Studies Within A Trial. Main outcome measures: Number of host trials funded. Results: Forty-two Studies Within A Trial were funded (31 host trials), across 12 Clinical Trials Units. The mean cost of a Study Within A Trial was £3535. Twelve Studies Within A Trial tested the same strategy across multiple host trials using a co-ordinated Study Within A Trial design, and four used a factorial design. Two recruitment and five retention strategies were evaluated in more than one host trial. PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial will add 18% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane systematic review of recruitment strategies, and 79% more Studies Within A Trial to the Cochrane review of retention strategies. For retention, we found that pre-notifying participants by card, letter or e-mail before sending questionnaires was effective, as was the use of pens, and sending personalised text messages to improve questionnaire response. We highlight key lessons learnt to guide others planning Studies Within A Trial, including involving patient and public involvement partners; prioritising and selecting strategies to evaluate and elements to consider when designing a Study Within A Trial; obtaining governance approvals; implementing Studies Within A Trial, including individual and co-ordinated Studies Within A Trials; and reporting Study Within A Trials. Limitations: The COVID-19 pandemic negatively impacted five Studies Within A Trial, being either delayed (nâ =â 2) or prematurely terminated (nâ =â 3). Conclusions: PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial significantly increased the evidence base for recruitment and retention strategies. When provided with both funding and practical support, host trial teams successfully implemented Studies Within A Trial. Future work: Future research should identify and target gaps in the evidence base, including widening Study Within A Trial uptake, undertaking more complex Studies Within A Trial and translating Study Within A Trial evidence into practice. Study registration: All Studies Within A Trial in the PROMoting THE Use of Studies Within A Trial programme had to be registered with the Northern Ireland Network for Trials Methodology Research Study Within A Trial Repository. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/55/80) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.
A Study Within A Trial is a research study nested inside a larger 'host trial', promoting the use of Studies Within A Trial aimed to do Study Within A Trial routine practice in clinical trial units by funding and supporting at least 25 Studies Within A Trial. The best way to test health and social care treatments is to do a randomised controlled trial ('trial'), where some patients get the treatment being tested and some do not. The results of different groups are compared to see if the treatment improves care. Recruiting patients and keeping them involved in trials is often very difficult. Research teams often do not know how best to recruit and keep patients engaged as the methods have not been tested to see if they work. The best way to test these methods is by doing a Study Within A Trial. We test a programme of Studies Within A Trial for recruiting and keeping patients engaged in trials. Trial teams were able to apply for funding of up to £5000 and receive support from Promoting the use of Study Within A Trial team to do Studies Within A Trial. We used our experience of doing Studies Within A Trial to outline lessons learnt for doing Studies Within A Trial. We funded 42 Studies Within A Trial and gave teams necessary advice to do them. We significantly increased the knowledge for both recruitment and retention strategies, and found 'pre-notifying' before sending questionnaires, sending pens and personalised text messages were all effective for increasing responses by participants. We tested Studies Within A Trial across several different trials at the same time to find out more quickly whether their methods worked. We highlight key lessons learnt to guide others doing Studies Within A Trial, including involving patient partners; picking the right strategy to test; getting ethical approvals; how to do and report Studies Within A Trial. Promoting the use of studies within a trial was successful and supported more Studies Within A Trial than planned. We hope our experience will support those doing Studies Within A Trial in the future.
Subject(s)
Exercise Therapy , Pandemics , Humans , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Feasibility Studies , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Research Design , Surveys and Questionnaires , United KingdomABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the risks, benefits and resource implications of using home-blended food in children with gastrostomy tubes compared with currently recommended formula feeds. DESIGN: This is a cohort study. Data were collected at months 0, 12 and 18 from parents and clinicians using standardised measures. SETTING: 32 sites across England: 28 National Health Service trusts and 4 children's hospices. PATIENTS: Children aged 6 months-18 years who were gastrostomy fed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome measure was the PedsQL Gastrointestinal Symptoms Scales score. Secondary outcomes included quality of life, sleep (child, parent), dietary intake, anthropometry, healthcare usage, safety outcomes and resource use. RESULTS: 180 children and families completed the baseline data collection, with 134 (74%) and 105 (58%) providing follow-up data at 12 and 18 months. There were fewer gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms at all time points in the home-blended diet group, but there was no difference in change over time within or between the groups. The nutritional intake of those on a home-blended diet had higher calories per kilogram and fibre, and both home-blended and formula-fed children have values above the dietary reference values for most micronutrients. Safety outcomes were similar between groups and over time. The total costs to the statutory sector were higher among children who were formula fed, but the costs of purchasing special equipment for home-blended food and the total time spent on childcare were higher for families with home-blended diet. CONCLUSIONS: Children who are gastrostomy fed a home-blended diet have similar safety profile, adequate nutritional intake and lower burden of GI symptoms than formula-fed children. Trial registration number ISRCTN13977361.
Subject(s)
Enteral Nutrition , Gastrostomy , Humans , Gastrostomy/adverse effects , Child, Preschool , Child , Infant , Enteral Nutrition/methods , Enteral Nutrition/adverse effects , Male , Female , Prospective Studies , Adolescent , Quality of Life , England , Nutritive Value , Food, FormulatedABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The increasing burden of depression and noncommunicable disease (NCD) is a global challenge, especially in low- and middle-income countries, considering the resource constraints and lack of trained human resources in these settings. Effective treatment of depression in people with NCDs has the potential to enhance both the mental and physical well-being of this population. It will also result in the effective use of the available health care resources. Brief psychological therapies, such as behavioral activation (BA), are effective for the treatment of depression. BA has not been adapted in the community health care services of India, and the feasibility of using BA as an intervention for depression in NCD and its effectiveness in these settings have not been systematically evaluated. OBJECTIVE: Our objective is to adapt BA for the Indian NCD context and test the acceptability, feasibility, and implementation of the adapted BA intervention (BEACON intervention package [BIP]). Additionally, we aim to test the feasibility of a randomized controlled trial evaluation of BIP for the treatment of depression compared with enhanced usual care. METHODS: Following well-established frameworks for intervention adaptation, we first adapted BA (to fit the linguistic, cultural, and resource context) for delivery in India. The intervention was also adapted for potential remote delivery by telephone. In a randomized controlled trial, we will be testing the acceptability, feasibility, and implementation of the adapted BA intervention (BIP). We shall also test if a randomized controlled feasibility trial can be delivered effectively and estimate important parameters (eg, recruitment and retention rates and completeness of follow-up) needed to design a future definitive trial. RESULTS: Following the receipt of approval from all the relevant agencies, the development of the BIP was started on November 28, 2020, and completed on August 18, 2021, and the quantitative data collection was started on August 23, 2021, and completed on December 10, 2021. Process evaluation (qualitative data) collection is ongoing. Both the qualitative and quantitative data analyses are ongoing. CONCLUSIONS: This study may offer insights that could help in closing the gap in the treatment of common mental illness, particularly in nations with limited resources, infrastructure, and systems such as India. To close this gap, BEACON tries to provide BA for depression in NCDs through qualified NCD (BA) counselors integrated within the state-run NCD clinics. The results of this study may aid in understanding whether BA as an intervention is acceptable for the population and how feasible it will be to deliver such interventions for depression in NCD in South Asian countries such as India. The BIP may also be used in the future by Indian community clinics as a brief intervention program. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Registry of India CTRI/2020/05/025048; https://tinyurl.com/mpt33jv5. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/41127.