Background: High quality data pertaining to the size of the transgender and gender diverse (TGD) population are scant, however, several recently published studies may provide more reliable contemporary estimates. Aims: To summarize the estimated number and proportion of TGD individuals overall and across age groups, based on most accurate data. Methods: This systematic review focused on recent studies (published from 2009 through 2019) that utilized sound methodology in assessing the proportion of TGD people in the general population. Publications were included if they used clear definitions of TGD status, and calculated proportions based on a well-defined sampling frame. Nineteen eligible publications represented two broad categories of studies: those that used data from large health care systems; and those that identified TGD individuals from population surveys. Results: Among health system-based studies, TGD persons were identified using relevant diagnostic codes or clinical notes. The proportions of individuals with a TGD-relevant diagnosis or other recorded evidence ranged between 17 and 33 per 100,000 enrollees. In population surveys TGD status was ascertained based on self-report with either narrow or broad definitions. The survey-based estimates were orders of magnitude higher and consistent across studies using similar definitions. When the surveys specifically inquired about ‘transgender’ identity, the estimates ranged from 0.3% to 0.5% among adults, and from 1.2% to 2.7% among children and adolescents. When the definition was expanded to include broader manifestations of ‘gender diversity’, the corresponding proportions increased to 0.5-4.5% among adults and 2.5-8.4% among children and adolescents. Upward temporal trends in the proportion of TGD people were consistently observed. Conclusions: Current data indicate that people who self-identify as TGD represent a sizable and increasing proportion of the general population. This proportion may differ, depending on inclusion criteria, age, and geographic location, but well-conducted studies of similar type and design tend to produce comparable results.

(2017). Language and trans health. International Journal of Transgenderism: Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 1-6.

Background: There is a general lack of recommendations for and basic information tailored at sexologists and other health-care professionals for when they encounter trans people in their practice. Aim: We present to clinicians an up-to-date overview of clinical consensus statements on trans health care with attention for sexual function and satisfaction. Methods: The task force consisted of 7 clinicians experienced in trans health care, selected among European Society for Sexual Medicine (ESSM) scientific committee. The consensus was guided by clinical experience and a review of the available literature and by interactive discussions on trans health, with attention for sexual function and satisfaction where available. Outcomes: The foci of the study are assessment and hormonal aspects of trans health care. Results: As the available literature for direct recommendations was limited, most of the literature was used as background or indirect evidence. Clinical consensus statements were developed based on clinical experiences and the available literature. With the multiple barriers to care that many trans people experience, basic care principles still need to be stressed. We recommend that health-care professionals (HCPs) working with trans people recognize the diversity of genders, including male, female, and nonbinary individuals. In addition, HCPs assessing gender diverse children and adolescents should take a developmental approach that acknowledges the difference between prepubescent gender diverse children and pubescent gender diverse adolescents and trans adults. Furthermore, trans people seeking gender-affirming medical interventions should be assessed by HCPs with expertise in trans health care and gender-affirming psychological practice. If masculinization is desired, testosterone therapy with monitoring of serum sex steroid levels and signs of virilization is recommended. Similarly, if feminization is desired, we recommend estrogens and/or antiandrogen therapy with monitoring of serum sex steroid levels and signs of feminization. HCPs should be aware of the influence of hormonal therapy on sexual functioning and satisfaction. We recommend HCPs be aware of potential sexual problems during all surgical phases of treatment. Clinical Implications: This is an up-to-date ESSM position statement. Strengths & Limitations: These statements are based on the data that are currently available; however, it is vital to recognize that this is a rapidly changing field and that the literature, particularly in the field of sexual functioning and satisfaction, is limited. Conclusion: This ESSM position statement provides relevant information and references to existing clinical guidelines with the aim of informing relevant HCPs on best practices when working with transgender people.

Background: Genderqueer and nonbinary () people have remained largely invisible in health research. Previous research shows worse outcomes on health indicators for trans people when compared with cisgender controls, but the differences between binary trans and GQNB individuals are inconclusive. Aims: To compare overall health and well-being of GQNB people with controls of trans men and trans women, taking into account the impact of the additive effect of their socio-economic position, as well as their current need for gender affirming medical interventions. Methods: A community-driven survey was conducted in 2016 in five countries (Georgia, Poland, Serbia, Spain, and Sweden). Self-reported health and general well-being were analysed for differences between binary trans and GQNB respondents. The effects of multiple control variables (age, economic situation, educational level, belonging to an ethnic, religious, sexual or ability minority group, sex assigned at birth) as well as the current need for gender affirming medical interventions were controlled for. Results: The sample consisted of 853 respondents aged 16 and older, with 254 trans women (29.8%), 369 trans men (43.2%), and 230 GQNB people (26%). GQNB respondents showed significantly worse self-reported health and worse general well-being in comparison to binary trans respondents. Additional negative impacts of having a lower educational level, having more economic stress, and belonging to a disability minority group were found. Being in need of gender affirming medical interventions contributed significantly to worse self-reported health, whereas being younger contributed to worse general well-being. Discussion: In understanding health disparities between binary trans and GQNB people, it is necessary to take into account the additive effect of multiple socio-economic positions, and the current need for gender affirming medical interventions. The high proportion of GQNB respondents who report worse health outcomes highlights the need for policy makers and health-care providers in creating nonbinary-inclusive environments.