Full article: Critiques of the Cass Review: Fact-Checking the Peer-Reviewed and Grey Literature

Abstract

The Cass Review’s final report, published in April 2024, made recommendations to the UK’s National Health Service regarding structuring of services for minors with gender-related distress. It recommended cautious use of hormonal interventions in this population and use of research protocols. Some clinician-researchers disagree with the Cass Review’s recommendations and have written critiques. A critique of the Cass Review posted on Yale Law School’s website in July 2024 has received extensive media coverage. Its references identified three other critiques. In these papers, there were multiple claims that were incorrect or that lacked essential clarification/contextualization. These claims involved (1) the Cass Review’s contents and processes; (2) the pediatric transgender healthcare evidence base; (3) existing clinical practice guidelines, including claims that there is international medical consensus; (4) evidence-based medical practice and guideline development; and (5) conclusions regarding the validity of the Cass Review’s findings. The Cass Review’s careful, balanced investigations and judgments were a comprehensive, evidence-based response to the controversies in this pediatric clinical arena. Recently-published critiques of the Review have contained incorrect or inadequately contextualized claims. Because accurate information about medical interventions is essential to informed consent, it is important to correct errors in potentially influential publications.

Source: Full article: Critiques of the Cass Review: Fact-Checking the Peer-Reviewed and Grey Literature

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.