↓ Skip to main content

From Mental Disorder to Iatrogenic Hypogonadism: Dilemmas in Conceptualizing Gender Identity Variants as Psychiatric Conditions

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Sexual Behavior, October 2009
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
151 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
250 Mendeley
Title
From Mental Disorder to Iatrogenic Hypogonadism: Dilemmas in Conceptualizing Gender Identity Variants as Psychiatric Conditions
Published in
Archives of Sexual Behavior, October 2009
DOI 10.1007/s10508-009-9532-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heino F. L. Meyer-Bahlburg

Abstract

The categorization of gender identity variants (GIVs) as "mental disorders" in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) of the American Psychiatric Association is highly controversial among professionals as well as among persons with GIV. After providing a brief history of GIV categorizations in the DSM, this paper presents some of the major issues of the ongoing debate: GIV as psychopathology versus natural variation; definition of "impairment" and "distress" for GID; associated psychopathology and its relation to stigma; the stigma impact of the mental-disorder label itself; the unusual character of "sex reassignment surgery" as a psychiatric treatment; and the consequences for health and mental-health services if the disorder label is removed. Finally, several categorization options are examined: Retaining the GID category, but possibly modifying its grouping with other syndromes; narrowing the definition to dysphoria and taking "disorder" out of the label; categorizing GID as a neurological or medical rather than a psychiatric disorder; removing GID from both the DSM and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD); and creating a special category for GIV in the DSM. I conclude that-as also evident in other DSM categories-the decision on the categorization of GIVs cannot be achieved on a purely scientific basis, and that a consensus for a pragmatic compromise needs to be arrived at that accommodates both scientific considerations and the service needs of persons with GIVs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 250 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 2%
Sweden 2 <1%
Canada 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Unknown 238 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 42 17%
Student > Bachelor 42 17%
Student > Master 34 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 30 12%
Researcher 19 8%
Other 46 18%
Unknown 37 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 90 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 42 17%
Social Sciences 30 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 3%
Other 24 10%
Unknown 48 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 May 2022.
All research outputs
#2,350,741
of 25,576,275 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Sexual Behavior
#1,092
of 3,763 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,749
of 108,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Sexual Behavior
#14
of 36 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,576,275 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,763 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 108,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 36 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.