Search

This study examines differences in score profiles on the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) and Youth Self-Report (YSR) for transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) youth in a clinical setting. Data were collected from youth receiving services at a gender care clinic in the Midwestern United States. Inclusion criteria were youth that identify as transgender, nonbinary, or another gender-diverse identity label between the ages of 6 and 18 and received services between October 2017 and November 2021. The analytic sample (N = 177) included 51.4% transmasculine, 17.5% transfeminine, 22.6% nonbinary/gender-expansive, and 8.5% questioning youth. 88.1% of youth were White. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests compared differences in mean T scores when using male versus female scoring templates for YSR and CBCL separately. Statistically significant differences were found on the majority of scales, particularly for TGD adolescents. For example, significant differences were found on the YSR for 10 of 11 scales for transmasculine and transfeminine youth ages 11–18 and 9 of 11 scales for nonbinary/gender-expansive youth. McNemar's test revealed significant differences in the number of clinical range scores for transmasculine YSR respondents on Anxious/Depressed, Somatic Complaints, Thought Problems, and Internalizing scales. For CBCL comparison of clinical significance, significant differences were found for Anxious/Depressed, Attention Problems, and Total Problems scales for transmasculine youth ages 12–18. Selecting a scoring template is contextually relevant; however, template selection appears to matter less when examining clinical relevance. Results suggest that clinicians using the CBCL and YSR with TGD youth have flexibility in scoring template selection. Public Significance Statement: When using screening measures with transgender and gender-diverse (TGD) youth to assess for mental health challenges that only have binary (male or female) scoring templates, like the Child Behavior Checklist and Youth Self-Report, scoring template selection does impact scores but does not result in large clinical differences. Clinicians using these screeners with TGD youth have flexibility on which scoring template to use, including scoring with both templates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Underrepresented in medicine (UIM) interns have unique lived experiences that affect their paths to medicine, and more information is needed for medical residency and fellowship programs to better support them., Objective: We describe self-reported differences between UIM and White physician interns in key demographic areas, including household income growing up, physician mentorship, and adverse childhood experiences (ACEs)., Methods: Between 2019 and 2021, we administered a diversity survey to incoming medical interns at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Response rates across the 3 years were 51.2% (167 of 326), 93.9% (310 of 330), and 98.9% (354 of 358), respectively. We conducted analyses to compare UIM and White groups across demographic variables of interest., Results: A total of 831 of 1014 interns (81.9%) completed the survey. Relative to White interns, UIM interns had lower household incomes growing up, lower rates of mentorship, and higher rates of experiencing 4 or more ACEs. The odds of experiencing the cumulative burden of having a childhood household income of $29,999 or less, no physician mentor, and 4 or more ACEs was approximately 10 times higher among UIM (6.41%) than White (0.66%) interns (OR=10.38, 95% CI 1.97-54.55)., Conclusions: Childhood household income, prior mentorship experiences, and number of ACEs differed between UIM and White interns., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Objective: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has instigated a paradigm shift in psychology graduate training and education. As these system-wide changes are being implemented, Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) continue to be disproportionately impacted as they simultaneously experience, witness, and relive the deleterious consequences of systemic and institutional racism as trainees and members of minoritized communities. The field requires a radical culture shift to counteract the effects of ongoing psychological harm on trainees of color., Method: Our analyses are grounded in two decolonizing frameworks, Critical Race Theory and Liberation Psychology. We also provide a systems-based analysis of how BIPOC trainees are impacted by systemic racism and examine how these -isms are perpetuated in psychology training. Testimonios are used as examples on how to center trainee's experiential knowledge., Conclusions: Psychology is uniquely positioned to transform how science and practice informs, builds, and sustains equitable systems for trainees and the public. The profession must question and disrupt the status quo and system inequities to build capacity and foster resistance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).