Eden Openly Editorial

Evidence Maps

Where the evidence on a question in transgender health has come from: which countries, which populations, which study designs and which measures. An Evidence Map counts and classifies the studies. It does not grade what they found.

What is an Evidence Map?

An Evidence Map answers a question an Evidence Review does not: not what the evidence shows, but where and how it was generated, and where it is missing. A map can show, for example, that almost all the evidence on a treatment comes from a few countries, or that few studies used a validated measure. Those are findings about the evidence base, and they matter for anyone caring for patients the studies did not include.

A stated question, with eligibility rules fixed and published.
The searches as actually run, and what was not searched.
Every screening decision published, each labelled with how it was made.
The map’s figures produced by published scripts from published data, so anyone can reproduce them.
Studies found outside the search reported beside the map, with what counting them would change.

What an Evidence Map is not

An Evidence Map is not a systematic review and does not grade findings. It is not peer reviewed, does not follow PRISMA and makes no risk-of-bias assessment. It can report that no eligible study was found; it cannot say that none exists. It is not a clinical guide and must not be used to start, stop or withhold treatment.

How it is checked

Screening and data extraction in our Evidence Maps are AI-assisted, and every decision in the deposited data says so. Every record sent to full text is checked blind before deposit, by the author or by an independent human reviewer working without AI, and the author rules on each disagreement. The author also re-screens a random sample of title-and-abstract decisions blind, and the agreement is published. Decisions no one has checked are never described as verified. Before deposit, every figure is checked against the data and the sources by a separate check that did not build the map, and what it found goes into the map’s correction record. How we use AI.

Published Evidence Maps

EM-001 · Version 1.1 · DOI 10.5281/zenodo.23646559
Korean patients deserve Korean evidence: an evidence map of sexual health after gender-affirming care — 190 studies and 19,819 participants; Korea contributed 3 studies and 70 participants (0.35%). Every record sent to full text checked blind by an independent human reviewer. Presented at the Korean Association for Sexual Health (대한성학회) autumn conference, 21 November 2026. Report (PDF) · Data and code

Each DOI above resolves to every version of the map. Each version has its own DOI, given on the map’s page and in its report.

Related publication types

Evidence Reviews — comprehensive syntheses of clinical evidence, with graded findings.
Evidence Notes — concise evidence summaries.
Guidance Appraisals — graded appraisals of guidance and policy documents.

Revision history

Corrected — 25 October 2026. The entries below were dated 26 October 2026. They were made on 25 October 2026 (UTC) and are now dated to match.

Updated — 25 October 2026. EM-001 version 1.1 listed. “How it is checked” now says the full-text check may be done by the author or an independent human reviewer, and the reproducibility line now says the scripts produce the map’s figures (not every number on the page).

Updated — 25 October 2026. “How it is checked” now includes the new rule that the author checks every full-text decision before deposit, and says that EM-001’s are being checked.

First published — 25 October 2026.