1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Digit ratio (2D:4D) and transgender identity: new original data and a meta-analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Previously reported associations between second-to-fourth digit length ratio (2D:4D), a proxy for prenatal androgen load, and transgender identity have been inconsistent. The objectives of the present study were to provide additional original data and an updated meta-analysis concerning this association. In a study of 464 participants, we compared the 2D:4D of transgender individuals with age- and sex-matched controls. Patients were recruited at a specialized psychiatrist’s medical office, whereas controls were hired via flyers, advertisements, and as convenience sample. A random-effects meta-analysis of the literature (17 samples, n = 3674) also quantifies the overall magnitude of the difference in 2D:4D between transgender individuals and controls. In our study providing new original data, we found a significantly higher (i.e. feminized) left-hand 2D:4D in the male-to-female transgender (MtF) identity [mean age: 32.3 (18; 61)] than in the male control group [mean age: 34.5 (18; 65)] with a Cohen’s d = 0.271. Concordantly, the meta-analytic results suggest a significant difference in 2D:4D among MtF individuals compared to male controls [g = 0.153; 95% CI (0.063; 0.243)], which was even more pronounced when individuals had been diagnosed by a clinician instead of self-identified as transgender [g = 0.193; 95% CI (0.086; 0.300)]. In both studies, no significant results were revealed for female-to-male transgender individuals [mean age: 26.1 (18; 53)] versus female controls [mean age: 27.2 (18; 55)]. This original investigation and the updated meta-analysis clarify the association between transgender identity and 2D:4D indicating the influence of prenatal androgen on the development of gender identity in subjects born as males.

          Related collections

          Most cited references73

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

            David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration

              Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarise evidence relating to efficacy and safety of healthcare interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, are not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (quality of reporting of meta-analysis) statement—a reporting guideline published in 1999—there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realising these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this explanation and elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA statement, this document, and the associated website (www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                eva-maria.siegmann@uk-erlangen.de
                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Sci Rep
                Scientific Reports
                Nature Publishing Group UK (London )
                2045-2322
                9 November 2020
                9 November 2020
                2020
                : 10
                : 19326
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.5330.5, ISNI 0000 0001 2107 3311, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, , Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), ; Schwabachanlage 6, 91054 Erlangen, Germany
                [2 ]Psychiatric Practice, Treibberg 5, 90403 Nuremberg, Germany
                [3 ]GRID grid.7700.0, ISNI 0000 0001 2190 4373, Department of Addictive Behavior and Addiction Medicine, Central Institute of Mental Health (CIMH), Medical Faculty Mannheim, , Heidelberg University, ; Heidelberg, Germany
                Article
                72486
                10.1038/s41598-020-72486-6
                7653965
                33168880
                e8cc7fcb-8438-49ee-ad5c-06d044c39b91
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 13 November 2019
                : 2 September 2020
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100005295, Staedtler Stiftung;
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002347, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung;
                Award ID: 01GL1745C
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100001659, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft;
                Award ID: 270949263/GRK2162/1
                Award Recipient :
                Funded by: Projekt DEAL
                Categories
                Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2020

                Uncategorized
                psychology,biomarkers,endocrinology,medical research
                Uncategorized
                psychology, biomarkers, endocrinology, medical research

                Comments

                Comment on this article