Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42393604›Full record

ArticleBMC psychiatry2026

Whose suffering counts? Research funding, scientific freedom, and the epistemic erasure of sexual and gender diverse children.

Christian Brettschneider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC psychiatry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Christian BrettschneiderDepartment of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20251, Hamburg, Germany. c.brettschneider@uke.de.ORCID 0000-0002-5280-1075

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The termination of U.S. federal funding for research on sexual and gender diverse youth mental health raises the question of what this commentary proposes to call epistemic obstruction: the systematic prevention of knowledge about a vulnerable population. Drawing on the case of Clark et al., it examines the consequences for scientific freedom, health economic reasoning, and international research responsibility.

Indexed as

Research Support as TopicSexual and Gender MinoritiesAdolescentFemaleHumansKnowledgeUnited StatesEpistemic obstructionEssential public health operationsLGBTQIA+ healthResearch fundingScientific freedomSexual and gender diverse youthSuicide prevention

Identifiers

PMID42393604
PMCPMC13330431

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.