安裝中文字典英文字典辭典工具!
安裝中文字典英文字典辭典工具!
|
- Cass Review - Wikipedia
The Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People (commonly, the Cass Review) was commissioned in 2020 by NHS England and NHS Improvement [1] and led by Hilary Cass, a retired consultant paediatrician and the former president of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health [2]
- Cass Review – Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for . . .
We would like to show you a description here but the site won’t allow us
- Cass Review - RationalWiki
The Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People, more commonly known as the Cass Review or Cass Report, is a 388-page government report on the provision of gender-affirming care to young people in the United Kingdom
- What the Cass Review Means for Trans Kids in Britain—and Beyond
Bell’s case and the CQC report increased scrutiny of GIDS, and ultimately led to NHS England commissioning the Independent Review of Gender Identity Services for Children and Young People,
- Critically appraising the cass report: methodological flaws and . . .
In this paper, we report our critique of the methodologies used to synthesise and generate evidence to inform the Cass report We then discuss how the Cass report draws several flawed conclusions from the evidence that it reviewed and commissioned
- Critiques of the Cass Review: Fact-Checking the Peer-Reviewed . . . - PubMed
The Cass Review, a comprehensive review of pediatric transgender healthcare commissioned by the UK’s National Health Service, was published in April 2024 Four articles critiquing the Cass Review have appeared in the peer-reviewed and grey literature
- Cass Review - Wikipedia
The Cass Review commissioned several independent, peer-reviewed systematic reviews into different areas of healthcare for children and young people with gender identity issues, including
- Methodological and Ethical Failures of the Cass Review: Why It Falls . . .
The Cass Review, despite being promoted as an authoritative document, suffers from serious methodological and ethical flaws Its selective evidence review, unrealistic study criteria, and underlying cisnormative bias have contributed to recommendations with harmful outcomes for trans youth
|
|
|