Clarifying the Less than 1%: The False Alarm of Transition Regret, Discontinuation, and Detransition

Recent U.S. government directives under the Trump administration have prioritized funding research on regret and detransition following gender-affirming care. Empirical evidence demonstrates that regret following gender-affirming care is exceedingly rare, occurring in less than 1% of recipients according to systematic reviews-with epidemiological evidence estimating approximately 1 in 1 million people. This disproportionate research focus violates health equity principles by diverting resources from well-documented health disparities affecting larger segments of transgender and nonbinary (trans) populations. Studying such rare outcomes also presents extremely significant methodological challenges. We argue that epidemiological-based research priorities, rather than ideologically driven agenda should inform trans health.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Transgender Health
Published
2025-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/26884887251364124
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Clarifying the Less than 1%: The False Alarm of Transition Regret, Discontinuation, and Detransition

Don Operario, Kristi E. Gamarel, Arjee Restar
Transgender Health
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
article

Clarifying the Less than 1%: The False Alarm of Transition Regret, Discontinuation, and Detransition

Don Operario, Kristi E. Gamarel, Arjee Restar
article en

Abstract

Recent U.S. government directives under the Trump administration have prioritized funding research on regret and detransition following gender-affirming care. Empirical evidence demonstrates that regret following gender-affirming care is exceedingly rare, occurring in less than 1% of recipients according to systematic reviews-with epidemiological evidence estimating approximately 1 in 1 million people. This disproportionate research focus violates health equity principles by diverting resources from well-documented health disparities affecting larger segments of transgender and nonbinary (trans) populations. Studying such rare outcomes also presents extremely significant methodological challenges. We argue that epidemiological-based research priorities, rather than ideologically driven agenda should inform trans health.

Transgender HealthVol. 10(6)
Emory University (US), University of Michigan (US), Yale University (US), Institute for Social Research (NO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 68%
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.