@jacindab.bsky.social
The report itself is the policy document based on four years of research including the systematic evidence reviews that were published simultaneously with the report. It wouldn't surprise me if the Yale paper authors did not even look at the systematic reviews.
November 15, 2025 at 11:28 PM
The report itself is the policy document based on four years of research including the systematic evidence reviews that were published simultaneously with the report. It wouldn't surprise me if the Yale paper authors did not even look at the systematic reviews.
I generally only block people who block me first.
November 15, 2025 at 11:25 PM
I generally only block people who block me first.
All the methods used to evaluate study quality were fully explained in the peer-reviewed publications underpinning the report.
November 15, 2025 at 11:06 PM
All the methods used to evaluate study quality were fully explained in the peer-reviewed publications underpinning the report.
You find out what happens with medical treatments by doing systematic, long-term follow up, and using appropriate comparison groups.
November 15, 2025 at 11:01 PM
You find out what happens with medical treatments by doing systematic, long-term follow up, and using appropriate comparison groups.
GRADE downgrades study quality for not being blinded RTCs. The Yale critique tries to imply that Cass's reference to high-quality research means GRADE, and therefore blinding. But Cass did not use GRADE, and does not demand studies with blinding. The critique is incoherent nonsense.
November 15, 2025 at 11:00 PM
GRADE downgrades study quality for not being blinded RTCs. The Yale critique tries to imply that Cass's reference to high-quality research means GRADE, and therefore blinding. But Cass did not use GRADE, and does not demand studies with blinding. The critique is incoherent nonsense.
That's ridiculous. We know exactly what happens with abortions, contraception, and vaccines (most). Social conservatism has nothing to do with it. Most gender critical people in the UK are on the left.
November 15, 2025 at 10:50 PM
That's ridiculous. We know exactly what happens with abortions, contraception, and vaccines (most). Social conservatism has nothing to do with it. Most gender critical people in the UK are on the left.
What was considered high low and moderate quality is explained in detail in the systematic reviews conducted for Cass. The part of the Yale critique that you say explains the flaw entirely focuses on GRADE and how GAC can't meet GRADE standards, which is irrelevant bluff.
November 15, 2025 at 10:47 PM
What was considered high low and moderate quality is explained in detail in the systematic reviews conducted for Cass. The part of the Yale critique that you say explains the flaw entirely focuses on GRADE and how GAC can't meet GRADE standards, which is irrelevant bluff.
In section 2 they imply that what Cass calls high-quality evidence would require GRADE standards, which give higher ratings for being blinded RCTs. This is nonsense. Cass explicitly stated that blinding is impossible and not needed for high quality studies. www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-...
November 15, 2025 at 10:36 PM
In section 2 they imply that what Cass calls high-quality evidence would require GRADE standards, which give higher ratings for being blinded RCTs. This is nonsense. Cass explicitly stated that blinding is impossible and not needed for high quality studies. www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-...
I think it's a grey area about whether this is required, but it would be good practice to mention it. And this was not a peer-reviewed critique, it was posted on Yale website and circulated on social media where people often have no idea who the authors are.
November 15, 2025 at 8:04 PM
I think it's a grey area about whether this is required, but it would be good practice to mention it. And this was not a peer-reviewed critique, it was posted on Yale website and circulated on social media where people often have no idea who the authors are.
I don't know if Caraballo eventually removed it or not, it was still up a year after the Cass review and has been widely circulated so I can probably find a copy.
November 15, 2025 at 7:52 PM
I don't know if Caraballo eventually removed it or not, it was still up a year after the Cass review and has been widely circulated so I can probably find a copy.
The Yale review is a hit piece written to be cited in litigation and by people like you. Some of the authors are clinicians whose own research was correctly rated low-quality in the reviews conducted for Cass (e.g. Turban) and this conflict of interest is not acknowledged.
November 15, 2025 at 7:50 PM
The Yale review is a hit piece written to be cited in litigation and by people like you. Some of the authors are clinicians whose own research was correctly rated low-quality in the reviews conducted for Cass (e.g. Turban) and this conflict of interest is not acknowledged.
There are no double-blind studies of GAC treatment. That is why the York team decided to use NOS for non-randomised designs. Caraballo circulated a screenshot on social media showing studies being downgraded for not being double-blinded, claiming it was from Cass 2024, when in was from NICE 2020.
November 15, 2025 at 7:48 PM
There are no double-blind studies of GAC treatment. That is why the York team decided to use NOS for non-randomised designs. Caraballo circulated a screenshot on social media showing studies being downgraded for not being double-blinded, claiming it was from Cass 2024, when in was from NICE 2020.
It is waffling. They are trying to imply that evidence was not rated high quality because it did not meet GRADE standards. In fact the evidence could have been rated high quality on NOS.
November 15, 2025 at 7:44 PM
It is waffling. They are trying to imply that evidence was not rated high quality because it did not meet GRADE standards. In fact the evidence could have been rated high quality on NOS.
Yes, they acknowledge NOS was used but waffle on about GRADE. They cannot even keep their own story straight.
November 15, 2025 at 7:39 PM
Yes, they acknowledge NOS was used but waffle on about GRADE. They cannot even keep their own story straight.
Because if you had read them you would know that GRADE was not used to evaluate study quality. All the scales used to rate study quality and the ratings given to each study are published within the reviews.
November 15, 2025 at 7:38 PM
Because if you had read them you would know that GRADE was not used to evaluate study quality. All the scales used to rate study quality and the ratings given to each study are published within the reviews.
If you mean Erin Reed, yes, Reed is a chronic purveyor of misinformation. Reed and Caraballo started the lies about studies being rejected in the Cass review if they were not double-blinded, and never corrected this.
November 15, 2025 at 7:36 PM
If you mean Erin Reed, yes, Reed is a chronic purveyor of misinformation. Reed and Caraballo started the lies about studies being rejected in the Cass review if they were not double-blinded, and never corrected this.
Studies were rated high quality if they scored over 75% on the modified Newcastale Ottowa Scale, a measure specifically develeoped for non-randomised designs, which does not have blinding as a criterion.
November 15, 2025 at 7:35 PM
Studies were rated high quality if they scored over 75% on the modified Newcastale Ottowa Scale, a measure specifically develeoped for non-randomised designs, which does not have blinding as a criterion.
I have read the systematic reviews conducted for the Cass report. You could read them too, if you actually care about evidence. adc.bmj.com/pages/gender...
Gender Identity Service Series | Archives of Disease in Childhood
A series of systematic reviews commissioned by the Cass Review and published in Archives of Disease in Childhood.
adc.bmj.com
November 15, 2025 at 7:34 PM
I have read the systematic reviews conducted for the Cass report. You could read them too, if you actually care about evidence. adc.bmj.com/pages/gender...
It doesn't matter what political hit pieces say, the York reviews conducted for Cass did not use GRADE. Anyone can verify this by looking at the peer-reviewed publications that contain full details of methodology. You haven't examined any evidence, just swalled propaganda.
November 15, 2025 at 7:32 PM
It doesn't matter what political hit pieces say, the York reviews conducted for Cass did not use GRADE. Anyone can verify this by looking at the peer-reviewed publications that contain full details of methodology. You haven't examined any evidence, just swalled propaganda.
You are seriously citing Andrea James' scientology style hit piece? Everyone who questions the evidence on gender affirmation for minors gets this treatment, so that gullible people like you can pull this up instead of examining evidence.
November 15, 2025 at 7:29 PM
You are seriously citing Andrea James' scientology style hit piece? Everyone who questions the evidence on gender affirmation for minors gets this treatment, so that gullible people like you can pull this up instead of examining evidence.
Peer-reviewed refutations of the 'Yale critique'
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
adc.bmj.com/content/110/...
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
adc.bmj.com/content/110/...
Gender medicine and the Cass Review: why medicine and the law make poor bedfellows
In April 2024, the final report of the Cass Review, an independent review chaired by Dr Hilary Cass, was published, offering recommendations to improve gender identity services for children and young ...
adc.bmj.com
November 15, 2025 at 7:00 PM
Peer-reviewed refutations of the 'Yale critique'
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
adc.bmj.com/content/110/...
www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
adc.bmj.com/content/110/...
The 'Yale critique' is a hit piece written for litigation and full of misrepresentations. The quality ratings conducted for Cass by the University of York did not use GRADE, they use NOS. Page 12 is not even coherent.
November 15, 2025 at 6:58 PM
The 'Yale critique' is a hit piece written for litigation and full of misrepresentations. The quality ratings conducted for Cass by the University of York did not use GRADE, they use NOS. Page 12 is not even coherent.
No studies were downgraded in the Cass review for not being blinded RCTs. The systematic reviews conducted for Cass by the University of York used the Newcastle Ottawa scale for non-randomised designs, which does not have blinding as a criterion.
November 15, 2025 at 6:50 PM
No studies were downgraded in the Cass review for not being blinded RCTs. The systematic reviews conducted for Cass by the University of York used the Newcastle Ottawa scale for non-randomised designs, which does not have blinding as a criterion.
You ate my hamster.
November 15, 2025 at 11:02 AM
You ate my hamster.
No studies were rejected or downgraded in quality in the Cass Review for not being double-blind tests. The systematic reviews conducted for Cass by the University of York rated quality of studies using a scale for non-randomised designs that did not have blinding as a criterion.
November 15, 2025 at 9:36 AM
No studies were rejected or downgraded in quality in the Cass Review for not being double-blind tests. The systematic reviews conducted for Cass by the University of York rated quality of studies using a scale for non-randomised designs that did not have blinding as a criterion.