Neuroscientist (PhD). Research interests include sex differences, dementia, sleep/circadian rhythms, and neuroimmunology.
- Tweets 14,629
- Following 116
- Followers 12,732
- Likes 18,882
Pinned Tweet
My pinned thread of threads, primarily containing citations and explanations about neurological/ psychological sex differences, sexuality, gender dysphoria, and other academic research interests of mine:
33
157
647
Apologies for the broad labels, but based on which position you most closely identify with, do you agree or disagree with the following statement:
“Trans women have female brains”
Also, please retweet for larger audience!
2%
Trans-activist: Agree
6%
Trans-activist: Disagree
2%
Gender critical: Agree
91%
Gender critical: Disagree
253 votes • 11 hours
6
29
19
1,167
What transgender neuroscience studies would you like to see us revisit and publish, whether as a rebuttal, critical reappraisal, commentary, or re-analysis (where possible)? Please cite below :)
Similar to what we did here:
link.springer.com/article/10…
6
20
87
2,149
Wanna bet?
link.springer.com/article/10…
16
1,023
This video highlights a huge issue with using science to justify political ideology.
It all sounds very convincing to the average person. I mean, why wouldn’t you trust “the science” when it “repeatedly” demonstrates that transgender individuals have brains of the opposite sex? Why would anyone deny this supposed “scientific fact”?
The problem is, people often don’t actually look at the studies critically. They see the “media-grabbing” headline finding and repeat it.
Many researchers and academics interested in this debate (myself included) have repeatedly pointed out (screaming & shouting) that much of this literature is based on small samples, confounded designs, questionable analyses and findings that often fail to replicate.
But that nuance gets completely lost.
A difference in one brain region becomes an “opposite-sex brain”. A shift towards the opposite-sex average becomes “brain sex”. An association becomes an explanation...
And before you know it, these claims are being used to justify real-world policy, whether that’s trans people’s inclusion in sport, or arguments around cross-sex hormonal “treatments”.
This is what happens when people blindly “follow the science” when they 1) don’t fully understand the studies, 2) can’t critically analyse them, and 3) take the conclusions at face value.
Science should absolutely inform these debates. But that also means actually interrogating the science, and not attack people when they highlight clear issues with the underlying data.
What did they actually test? How big was the sample? What were the confounders? Did they test the interaction? Has it replicated? And does the evidence actually support the claim being made?
Because “a study found X” and “science has established X” are not the same thing.
This is a dangerous game to play…
17
96
281
5,867
Sammy retweeted
It's going to be the work of many years to debunk all the zombie genderist "studies". But this is a good one to knock down
🚨NEW: Our critique of a major "brain sex" study is now published.
@AdamRochussen, @NeuroSGS, and I evaluate a central premise of gender activism and medicine: that trans-identifying people have brains that are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity."
The "brain sex" concept is so central because it purports to provide an empirical scientific basis for the notion that a child can be "born in the wrong body" and would therefore benefit from body-altering medical procedures to align their body with their mind/brain.
The problem is that this concept is pure pseudoscience and propped up by deeply flawed methods and badly misinterpreted data.
One of the most prominent studies is Kurth et al. (2022), published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine, which claimed that the brains of transgender women are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity." The paper became one of the journal’s most accessed articles and has been cited in major media outlets, scientific papers, legal arguments, and policy discussions involving pediatric gender medicine and sports.
We point out that the paper's headline conclusion rests on a series of serious methodological problems.
Each group contained only 24 participants. The authors used poorly justified parametric methods, one-tailed post hoc tests, made no correction for multiple comparisons, and omitted important robustness checks. Once accounted for, the main finding is no longer statistically significant.
An even more glaring failure of the study was that it failed to account for sexual orientation, despite its known association with neuroanatomical variation and despite the authors having the relevant participant data needed to examine it!
We each repeatedly requested the anonymized participant-level data from the paper's lead author so we could independently evaluate the findings.
We received no response.
The evidence simply does not justify the sweeping "brain sex" conclusion for which this study has become famous.
Our full critique in @Theory_Society is open access. Read it at the link below, and please cite it and share it whenever you encounter the false claim that trans people have brains that more closely resemble the sex they identify than their own sex.
🔗link.springer.com/article/10…
22
326
1,873
101,180
Everybody knows the famous Kurth et al., 2022 study (cited below) about “brain-sex” in transgender women being shifted to their “gender identity”.
Colin Wright (@SwipeWright), Adam Rochussen (@AdamRochussen), and myself wrote a post-publication peer-review discussing the methodological and statistical issues with this famous paper.
It’s now been published!
Read below! 💪🏼
31
186
625
13,736
This video highlights a huge issue with using science to justify political ideology.
It all sounds very convincing to the average person. I mean, why wouldn’t you trust “the science” when it “repeatedly” demonstrates that transgender individuals have brains of the opposite sex? Why would anyone deny this supposed “scientific fact”?
The problem is, people often don’t actually look at the studies critically. They see the “media-grabbing” headline finding and repeat it.
Many researchers and academics interested in this debate (myself included) have repeatedly pointed out (screaming & shouting) that much of this literature is based on small samples, confounded designs, questionable analyses and findings that often fail to replicate.
But that nuance gets completely lost.
A difference in one brain region becomes an “opposite-sex brain”. A shift towards the opposite-sex average becomes “brain sex”. An association becomes an explanation...
And before you know it, these claims are being used to justify real-world policy, whether that’s trans people’s inclusion in sport, or arguments around cross-sex hormonal “treatments”.
This is what happens when people blindly “follow the science” when they 1) don’t fully understand the studies, 2) can’t critically analyse them, and 3) take the conclusions at face value.
Science should absolutely inform these debates. But that also means actually interrogating the science, and not attack people when they highlight clear issues with the underlying data.
What did they actually test? How big was the sample? What were the confounders? Did they test the interaction? Has it replicated? And does the evidence actually support the claim being made?
Because “a study found X” and “science has established X” are not the same thing.
This is a dangerous game to play…
17
96
281
5,867
Here’s an example of exactly what I mean.
The first study mentioned in the video (Kurth et al., 2022) is clearly being used to justify policy. Except, when you actually look critically at the study, the data don’t support the authors’ own conclusions.
We (@SwipeWright, @AdamRochussen, and myself) explain why in our new commentary 👇
link.springer.com/article/10…
3
10
66
692
Seems like a good opportunity to leave this here ☺️
link.springer.com/article/10…
Here is a great study on the human brain that shows how a trans woman’s brain is more aligned with a female brain. They took samples of C1S men & women, as well as trans women before any affirming care or hormones. For those that deny science I expect you to find a way to dismiss this and carry on with your transphobia, this isn’t for you. This is for those that actually want to learn more about who we are and why we are. So then can understand.
I do wish they also included trans men as I believe the results would show the same as trans women (just opposite obvi).
#trans #transhealth #loveislove Trans Women are Women
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/article…
6
70
2,128
Sammy retweeted
Clinical proponents of the transgender brain theory never say that young patients should undergo brain scans as part of diagnosis.
The theory seems intended purely for lay consumption and reassurance of parents (& maybe clinicians).
New peer reviewed article on the science👇
🚨NEW: Our critique of a major "brain sex" study is now published.
@AdamRochussen, @NeuroSGS, and I evaluate a central premise of gender activism and medicine: that trans-identifying people have brains that are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity."
The "brain sex" concept is so central because it purports to provide an empirical scientific basis for the notion that a child can be "born in the wrong body" and would therefore benefit from body-altering medical procedures to align their body with their mind/brain.
The problem is that this concept is pure pseudoscience and propped up by deeply flawed methods and badly misinterpreted data.
One of the most prominent studies is Kurth et al. (2022), published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine, which claimed that the brains of transgender women are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity." The paper became one of the journal’s most accessed articles and has been cited in major media outlets, scientific papers, legal arguments, and policy discussions involving pediatric gender medicine and sports.
We point out that the paper's headline conclusion rests on a series of serious methodological problems.
Each group contained only 24 participants. The authors used poorly justified parametric methods, one-tailed post hoc tests, made no correction for multiple comparisons, and omitted important robustness checks. Once accounted for, the main finding is no longer statistically significant.
An even more glaring failure of the study was that it failed to account for sexual orientation, despite its known association with neuroanatomical variation and despite the authors having the relevant participant data needed to examine it!
We each repeatedly requested the anonymized participant-level data from the paper's lead author so we could independently evaluate the findings.
We received no response.
The evidence simply does not justify the sweeping "brain sex" conclusion for which this study has become famous.
Our full critique in @Theory_Society is open access. Read it at the link below, and please cite it and share it whenever you encounter the false claim that trans people have brains that more closely resemble the sex they identify than their own sex.
🔗link.springer.com/article/10…
12
43
251
11,055
Our commentary:
link.springer.com/article/10…
2
9
41
1,213
Sammy retweeted
🚨NEW: Our critique of a major "brain sex" study is now published.
@AdamRochussen, @NeuroSGS, and I evaluate a central premise of gender activism and medicine: that trans-identifying people have brains that are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity."
The "brain sex" concept is so central because it purports to provide an empirical scientific basis for the notion that a child can be "born in the wrong body" and would therefore benefit from body-altering medical procedures to align their body with their mind/brain.
The problem is that this concept is pure pseudoscience and propped up by deeply flawed methods and badly misinterpreted data.
One of the most prominent studies is Kurth et al. (2022), published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine, which claimed that the brains of transgender women are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity." The paper became one of the journal’s most accessed articles and has been cited in major media outlets, scientific papers, legal arguments, and policy discussions involving pediatric gender medicine and sports.
We point out that the paper's headline conclusion rests on a series of serious methodological problems.
Each group contained only 24 participants. The authors used poorly justified parametric methods, one-tailed post hoc tests, made no correction for multiple comparisons, and omitted important robustness checks. Once accounted for, the main finding is no longer statistically significant.
An even more glaring failure of the study was that it failed to account for sexual orientation, despite its known association with neuroanatomical variation and despite the authors having the relevant participant data needed to examine it!
We each repeatedly requested the anonymized participant-level data from the paper's lead author so we could independently evaluate the findings.
We received no response.
The evidence simply does not justify the sweeping "brain sex" conclusion for which this study has become famous.
Our full critique in @Theory_Society is open access. Read it at the link below, and please cite it and share it whenever you encounter the false claim that trans people have brains that more closely resemble the sex they identify than their own sex.
🔗link.springer.com/article/10…
135
872
3,060
305,224
Read our commentary here!! 💪🏼💪🏼
🚨NEW: Our critique of a major "brain sex" study is now published.
@AdamRochussen, @NeuroSGS, and I evaluate a central premise of gender activism and medicine: that trans-identifying people have brains that are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity."
The "brain sex" concept is so central because it purports to provide an empirical scientific basis for the notion that a child can be "born in the wrong body" and would therefore benefit from body-altering medical procedures to align their body with their mind/brain.
The problem is that this concept is pure pseudoscience and propped up by deeply flawed methods and badly misinterpreted data.
One of the most prominent studies is Kurth et al. (2022), published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine, which claimed that the brains of transgender women are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity." The paper became one of the journal’s most accessed articles and has been cited in major media outlets, scientific papers, legal arguments, and policy discussions involving pediatric gender medicine and sports.
We point out that the paper's headline conclusion rests on a series of serious methodological problems.
Each group contained only 24 participants. The authors used poorly justified parametric methods, one-tailed post hoc tests, made no correction for multiple comparisons, and omitted important robustness checks. Once accounted for, the main finding is no longer statistically significant.
An even more glaring failure of the study was that it failed to account for sexual orientation, despite its known association with neuroanatomical variation and despite the authors having the relevant participant data needed to examine it!
We each repeatedly requested the anonymized participant-level data from the paper's lead author so we could independently evaluate the findings.
We received no response.
The evidence simply does not justify the sweeping "brain sex" conclusion for which this study has become famous.
Our full critique in @Theory_Society is open access. Read it at the link below, and please cite it and share it whenever you encounter the false claim that trans people have brains that more closely resemble the sex they identify than their own sex.
🔗link.springer.com/article/10…
19
127
2,793
Sammy retweeted
25 years after our original study showing there are on-average sex differences in the mind, we publish the first replication, confirming this theguardian.com/science/2026…
36
124
549
123,242
Important work from @SwipeWright, @NeuroSGS, and @AdamRochussen dismantling the “brain sex” myth and the junk science used to prop it up. ⬇️
🚨NEW: Our critique of a major "brain sex" study is now published.
@AdamRochussen, @NeuroSGS, and I evaluate a central premise of gender activism and medicine: that trans-identifying people have brains that are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity."
The "brain sex" concept is so central because it purports to provide an empirical scientific basis for the notion that a child can be "born in the wrong body" and would therefore benefit from body-altering medical procedures to align their body with their mind/brain.
The problem is that this concept is pure pseudoscience and propped up by deeply flawed methods and badly misinterpreted data.
One of the most prominent studies is Kurth et al. (2022), published in the Journal of Clinical Medicine, which claimed that the brains of transgender women are shifted away from their sex and toward their "gender identity." The paper became one of the journal’s most accessed articles and has been cited in major media outlets, scientific papers, legal arguments, and policy discussions involving pediatric gender medicine and sports.
We point out that the paper's headline conclusion rests on a series of serious methodological problems.
Each group contained only 24 participants. The authors used poorly justified parametric methods, one-tailed post hoc tests, made no correction for multiple comparisons, and omitted important robustness checks. Once accounted for, the main finding is no longer statistically significant.
An even more glaring failure of the study was that it failed to account for sexual orientation, despite its known association with neuroanatomical variation and despite the authors having the relevant participant data needed to examine it!
We each repeatedly requested the anonymized participant-level data from the paper's lead author so we could independently evaluate the findings.
We received no response.
The evidence simply does not justify the sweeping "brain sex" conclusion for which this study has become famous.
Our full critique in @Theory_Society is open access. Read it at the link below, and please cite it and share it whenever you encounter the false claim that trans people have brains that more closely resemble the sex they identify than their own sex.
🔗link.springer.com/article/10…
1
38
124
5,029
It’s kind of amusing that many of these studies you cite are contradictory.
A huge citation dump is NOT evidence the literature is conclusive, replicable, or convincing…
If we have to go through these studies one by one to make you all realise the issues with this literature, then so be it!
Here is a comprehensive list of every study ever done on the brain-sex anomalies in transgender individuals (at least what AI could find). That's the neat thing about science, it doesn't live or die by a single study, I look forward to your breakdown of every single one of these, have fun.
Zhou JN, Hofman MA, Gooren LJ, Swaab DF. Nature. 1995.
Kruijver FPM, Zhou JN, Pool CW, Hofman MA, Gooren LJ, Swaab DF. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2000.
Garcia-Falgueras A, Swaab DF. Brain. 2008.
Taziaux M, Swaab DF, Bakker J. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012.
Garcia-Falgueras A, Ligtenberg L, Kruijver FP, Swaab DF. Brain Res. 2011.
Yokota Y, Kawamura Y, Kameya Y. Neurosci Res. 2005.
Hulshoff Pol HE, Cohen-Kettenis PT, Van Haren NEM, et al. Eur J Endocrinol. 2006.
Luders E, Sánchez FJ, Gaser C, et al. NeuroImage. 2009.
Luders E, Sánchez FJ, Tosun D, et al. J Psychiatr Res. 2012.
Savic I, Arver S. Cereb Cortex. 2011.
Rametti G, Carrillo B, Gómez-Gil E, et al. J Psychiatr Res. 2011a.
Rametti G, Carrillo B, Gómez-Gil E, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2011b.
Rametti G, Carrillo B, Gómez-Gil E, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2012.
Santarnecchi E, Vatti G, Déttore D, Rossi A. J Sex Med. 2012.
Simon L, Kozák LR, Simon V, et al. PLoS One. 2013.
Zubiaurre-Elorza L, Junque C, Gómez-Gil E, et al. Cereb Cortex. 2013.
Zubiaurre-Elorza L, Junque C, Gómez-Gil E, Guillamon A. J Sex Med. 2014.
Hahn A, Kranz GS, Küblböck M, et al. J Neurosci. 2015.
Hoekzema E, Schagen SEE, Kreukels BPC, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015.
Manzouri A, Kosidou K, Savic I. Cereb Cortex. 2017.
Manzouri A, Savic I. Sci Rep. 2018.
Manzouri A, Savic I. Cereb Cortex. 2019.
Kranz GS, Hahn A, Kaufmann U, et al. J Neurosci. 2014.
Kranz GS, Hahn A, Kaufmann U, et al. Hum Brain Mapp. 2014.
Kranz GS, Seiger R, Kaufmann U, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015.
Kranz GS, Seiger R, Kaufmann U, et al. NeuroImage. 2017.
Seiger R, Hahn A, Hummer A, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016.
Seiger R, Hahn A, Hummer A, et al. NeuroImage. 2016.
Mueller SC, De Cuypere G, T’Sjoen G. J Sex Med. 2017.
Mueller SC, Guillamon A, Zubiaurre-Elorza L, et al. J Sex Med. 2021.
Khorashad BS, Khazai B, Talaei A, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2020.
Skorska MN, Chavez S, Devenyi GA, et al. Cereb Cortex. 2021.
Skorska MN, Chavez S, Devenyi GA, et al. Hum Brain Mapp. 2023.
Burke SM, Cohen-Kettenis PT, Veltman DJ, et al. Front Endocrinol. 2014.
Burke SM, Kreukels BPC, Cohen-Kettenis PT, et al. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2016.
Burke SM, Manzouri AH, Dhejne C, et al. Cereb Cortex. 2018.
Beking T, Burke SM, Geuze RH, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2020.
Gizewski ER, Krause E, Schlamann M, et al. J Sex Med. 2009.
Berglund H, Lindström P, Dhejne-Helmy C, Savic I. Cereb Cortex. 2008.
Nawata H, Ogomori K, Tanaka M, et al. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2010.
Ku HL, Lin CS, Chao HT, et al. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2013.
Lin CS, Ku HL, Chao HT, et al. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2014.
Junger J, Habel U, Bröhr S, et al. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2014.
Clemens B, Junger J, Pauly K, et al. J Sex Med. 2017.
Feusner JD, Lidström A, Moody TD, et al. Brain Imaging Behav. 2017.
Nota NM, Kreukels BPC, den Heijer M, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2017.
Spies M, Hahn A, Kranz GS, et al. J Psychiatr Res. 2016.
Soleman RS, Schagen SEE, Veltman DJ, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2013.
Soleman RS, Staphorsius AS, Cohen-Kettenis PT, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016.
Schöning S, Engelien A, Bauer C, et al. J Sex Med. 2010.
Smith ES, Junger J, Derntl B, Habel U. J Sex Med. 2015.
Guillamon A, Junque C, Gómez-Gil E. Arch Sex Behav. 2016.
Kreukels BPC, Guillamon A. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2016.
Frigerio A, Ballerini L, Valdés Hernández M. Arch Sex Behav. 2021.
Flint C, Förster K, Koser SA, et al. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2020.
Baldinger-Melich P, Urquijo Castro MF, Seiger R, et al. Cereb Cortex. 2020.
Kilpatrick LA, Holmberg M, Manzouri A, Savic I. Cereb Cortex. 2019.
Uribe C, Junque C, Gómez-Gil E, et al. NeuroImage Clin. 2020.
Starcevic A, Dakovic M, Radojicic Z, et al. Medicina. 2020.
Wang Y, Khorashad BS, Feusner JD, et al. Cereb Cortex. 2021.
Majid DSA, Burke SM, Manzouri A, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2020.
Clemens B, Derntl B, Smith E, et al. NeuroImage. 2020.
Nouwen A, et al. related adolescent structural papers overlapping Hoekzema/Burke cohorts.
Spizzirri G, Duran FLS, Chaim-Avancini TM, et al. Sci Rep. 2018.
Luders E, Gaser C, Narr KL, Toga AW. related sex-classifier work preceding 2022.
Holmes D, et al. various small VBM replications of putamen/thalamus.
Simon L, et al. follow-up functional connectivity.
Hahn A, Kranz GS, Sladky R, et al. Hum Brain Mapp. 2016.
Kranz GS, Seiger R, Henning A, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2018.
Seiger R, Hahn A, Kranz GS, et al. J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2015.
Lanzenberger R, Kranz GS, Haeusler D, et al. related PET serotonin/dopamine papers in MtF.
Hahn A, Haeusler D, Kranz GS, et al. related PET.
Staphorsius AS, Kreukels BPC, Cohen-Kettenis PT, et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015.
Cohen-Kettenis PT, van Goozen SHM, Doorn CD, Gooren LJG. early related behavioral/brain papers.
Bakker J, et al. adolescent pheromone fMRI (Liège/Amsterdam).
Skorska MN, Chavez S, VanderLaan DP, et al. additional youth T1-relaxometry.
Mueller SC, Wierckx K, Jackson K, T’Sjoen G. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016.
Nota NM, Burke SM, den Heijer M, et al. related rs-fMRI.
Feusner JD, Dervisic J, Moody T, et al. own-body perception fMRI.
Kilpatrick LA, et al. additional Savic-group CTh/SA papers.
Manzouri A, Savic I. own-body network papers 2017–2019.
Savic I, Garcia-Falgueras A, Swaab DF. Prog Brain Res. 2010.
Swaab DF, Garcia-Falgueras A. Funct Neurol. 2009.
Swaab DF. various handbook chapters summarizing the postmortem series.
Kruijver FPM. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam. 2004.
Fernández R, Esteva I, Gómez-Gil E, et al. related genetics plus occasional MRI.
Altinay M, Anand A. related mood/connectivity.
Fisher AD, Ristori J, Morelli G, Maggi M. reviews citing the imaging set.
Nguyen HB, Loughead J, Lipner E, et al. Biol Psychiatry. 2019.
Turban JL, et al. not primary imaging.
Hembree WC, et al. Endocrine Society guideline citing the above.
Taziaux M, et al. kisspeptin/NKB infundibular nucleus follow-ups.
Bao AM, Swaab DF. related reviews of the postmortem collection.
Garcia-Falgueras A, Swaab DF. additional INAH papers.
Chung WCJ, De Vries GJ, Swaab DF. BSTc developmental timing paper (non-trans sample, often cited with the series).
Zhou JN, Hofman MA, Gooren LJ, Swaab DF. Nature. 1995. (BSTc volume)
Kruijver FPM et al. JCEM. 2000. (BSTc neuron number)
Garcia-Falgueras A, Swaab DF. Brain. 2008. (INAH-3)
Taziaux M, Swaab DF, Bakker J. JCEM. 2012. (NKB)
Mueller SC et al. J Sex Med. 2021. (ENIGMA n=803)
Hoekzema E et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015.
Savic I, Arver S. Cereb Cortex. 2011.
Luders E et al. NeuroImage. 2009.
Zubiaurre-Elorza L et al. Cereb Cortex. 2013.
Rametti G et al. J Psychiatr Res. 2011; Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2011; 2012.
Hahn A et al. J Neurosci. 2015.
Kranz GS et al. J Neurosci. 2014; Hum Brain Mapp. 2014.
Manzouri A, Savic I. Cereb Cortex. 2017; 2019.
Flint C et al. Neuropsychopharmacology. 2020.
Skorska MN et al. Cereb Cortex. 2021.
Khorashad BS et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2020.
Burke SM et al. Front Endocrinol. 2014; J Psychiatry Neurosci. 2016.
Gizewski ER et al. J Sex Med. 2009.
Berglund H et al. Cereb Cortex. 2008.
Clemens B et al. J Sex Med. 2017.
Feusner JD et al. Brain Imaging Behav. 2017.
Nota NM et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2017.
Uribe C et al. NeuroImage Clin. 2020.
Wang Y et al. Cereb Cortex. 2021.
Spizzirri G et al. Sci Rep. 2018.
Baldinger-Melich P et al. Cereb Cortex. 2020.
Kilpatrick LA et al. Cereb Cortex. 2019.
Seiger R et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2016.
Kranz GS, Seiger R et al. later Vienna PET/MRI series.
Staphorsius AS et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2015.
Soleman RS et al. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2013; 2016.
Junger J et al. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2014.
Ku HL et al. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2013.
Lin CS et al. World J Biol Psychiatry. 2014.
Nawata H et al. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2010.
Simon L et al. PLoS One. 2013.
Santarnecchi E et al. J Sex Med. 2012.
Yokota Y et al. Neurosci Res. 2005.
Hulshoff Pol HE et al. Eur J Endocrinol. 2006.
Zubiaurre-Elorza L et al. J Sex Med. 2014.
Luders E et al. J Psychiatr Res. 2012.
Frigerio A et al. Arch Sex Behav. 2021.
Guillamon A et al. Arch Sex Behav. 2016.
Kreukels BPC, Guillamon A. Int Rev Psychiatry. 2016.
Smith ES et al. J Sex Med. 2015.
5
28
281
5,187