Nonprescribed androgen use among women and trans men

Havnes, Ingrid Amalia; Muller, Ashley Elizabeth

doi:10.1097/med.0000000000000680

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…diminish threat-based negative attitudes toward statistically less frequent variations in sexual orientation and gender identity as well as EBAGH-driven stereotypes of cisgender men. Lastly, reminiscent of AAS users (see Kimergård, 2015), some members of the transgender community self-treat with nonprescribed hormones (Havnes & Muller, 2021;Rotondi et al, 2013) and/or offer peer-to-peer guidance born out of dissatisfaction with the content and framing of relevant information available through medical sources (Bosom & Medico, 2021). EBAGH-congruent conceptualizations of testosterone in such contexts could have adverse consequences: For example, Castañeda (2020) observed that some Filipino transgender men who videorecorded their experiences appeared euphoric before their first testosterone dose, but given an "expectation of being gendered as male after T, the tolerance for misgendering is lowered," which could trigger "relapse to dysphoria since their masculinity is even further questioned despite testosterone" (p. 14).…”

Section: Intervention Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gonadal hormones: The men, the myths, and the legends.

Burris,

Knox

2024

Psychology of Men & Masculinities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Gender is one of the most essentialized social categories, with putative differences between cisgender men and cisgender women often framed in biological terms. We propose that the consequences of inaccurate and widely held essentialist beliefs about gonadal hormones (EBAGHs) in particular-that is, that androgens signify "men" and estrogens signify "not-men"-have yet to be fully appreciated. For example, placebo effects such as increased strength, sexual desire, and irritability have been documented for the androgen testosterone. Accumulating research also suggests that lay understandings exaggerate the causal importance of testosterone in men's aggression. Consequently, testosterone is often either eschewed (i.e., men are "poisoned" by it) or enshrined ("more is good, less is bad"). Moreover, the efficacy-bolstering role of estrogens such as estradiol across the physical, cognitive, and sexual health domains for men has been downplayed or ignored by those who assert pejorative links between estrogen and weakness or effeminacy. Critically, EBAGHs may fuel "hypermasculine" behaviors such as excessive red meat consumption, problematic alcohol intake, and anabolic steroid misuse as well as treatment seeking for "low T" in the absence of proper medical diagnosis-which can all, ironically, result in disrupting men's optimal hormonal balance. Implications of our analysis for research (e.g., EBAGHs as predictors men's health behaviors, use of bogus "hormonal profiles" to induce or assuage threats to masculinity in experimental studies) and interventions (e.g., "hormone education" to offset the adverse effects of EBAGHs) are discussed. Public Significance StatementInaccurate beliefs about gonadal hormones may cause testosterone to be either valued or devalued-and estrogen to be portrayed as the enemy-in men. Such beliefs may contribute to hypermasculine behaviors, poor diet, misguided health care, and other negative outcomes for men. Biologically accurate hormone education may therefore have beneficial consequences for men's self-perception, perception by others, and overall well-being.

show abstract

Section: Intervention Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gonadal hormones: The men, the myths, and the legends.

Burris,

Knox

2024

Psychology of Men & Masculinities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Machine learning in systematic reviews: Comparing automated text clustering with Lingo3G and human researcher categorization in a rapid review

Muller

Ames

Jardim

et al. 2021

Research Synthesis Methods

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Systematic reviews are resource‐intensive. The machine learning tools being developed mostly focus on the study identification process, but tools to assist in analysis and categorization are also needed. One possibility is to use unsupervised automatic text clustering, in which each study is automatically assigned to one or more meaningful clusters. Our main aim was to assess the usefulness of an automated clustering method, Lingo3G, in categorizing studies in a simplified rapid review, then compare performance (precision and recall) of this method compared to manual categorization. We randomly assigned all 128 studies in a review to be coded by a human researcher blinded to cluster assignment (mimicking two independent researchers) or by a human researcher non‐blinded to cluster assignment (mimicking one researcher checking another's work). We compared time use, precision and recall of manual categorization versus automated clustering. Automated clustering and manual categorization organized studies by population and intervention/context. Automated clustering failed to identify two manually identified categories but identified one additional category not identified by the human researcher. We estimate that automated clustering has similar precision to both blinded and non‐blinded researchers (e.g., 88% vs. 89%), but higher recall (e.g., 89% vs. 84%). Manual categorization required 49% more time than automated clustering. Using a specific clustering algorithm, automated clustering can be helpful with categorization of and identifying patterns across studies in simpler systematic reviews. We found that the clustering was sensitive enough to group studies according to linguistic differences that often corresponded to the manual categories.

show abstract

What is the prevalence of anabolic‐androgenic steroid use among women? A systematic review

Piatkowski,

Whiteside,

Robertson

et al. 2024

Addiction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aimEvidence suggests there has been an increase in anabolic‐androgenic steroid (AAS) use among women, driven by the evolving landscape of women's participation in sport. However, the extent of use is unknown. This systematic review aimed to estimate the prevalence of women's AAS use.MethodWe conducted a systematic review of peer‐reviewed articles in English, focusing on AAS use among women aged 18 and above. We excluded grey literature and studies that measured doping through some form of analysis (e.g. urine or hair). Searched databases were MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SocINDEX, SPORTDiscus, Embase and Cochrane Library. Titles and abstracts for all articles were screened, followed by full‐text assessment and data extraction of included articles by multiple authors for accuracy. The pooled prevalence of lifetime use was determined using a random effects model and the risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Prevalence Critical Appraisal Tool.ResultsBased on 18 studies, participant numbers averaged 669 per study (median = 189; range = 16 to 7051). The overall pooled AAS use prevalence was 4% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2–9%) with high heterogeneity overall (I2 = 95%). In the subgroup analysis, AAS use prevalence was 16.8% (95% CI = 11.0–24.9%, I2 = 44%) in the bodybuilder subgroup, 4.4% (95% CI = 1.2–15.1%, I2 = 93%) in athletes/recreational gym user subgroup, and 1.4% (95% CI = 0.4–4.7%, I2 = 96%) in the general population/other subgroup. Meta‐regression demonstrated significantly higher AAS use in bodybuilders compared with the other subgroup (P = 0.011).ConclusionAnabolic‐androgenic steroid use among women appears to be substantially higher among bodybuilders and athletes/recreational gym users than the general female population.

show abstract

Nonprescribed androgen use among women and trans men

Cited by 3 publications

References 61 publications

Gonadal hormones: The men, the myths, and the legends.

Gonadal hormones: The men, the myths, and the legends.

Machine learning in systematic reviews: Comparing automated text clustering with Lingo3G and human researcher categorization in a rapid review

What is the prevalence of anabolic‐androgenic steroid use among women? A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About