Furthermore, our analysisexcluded students who identified as transgender, as factorsrelated to MH service use and treatment needs likely differfor LGBQQ students and transgender students[31], and therelatively small number of transgender students identified in ourstudy is insufficient for a separate analysis. Future studies areneeded to better understand MH treatment need, service use,and barriers to seeking on-campus MH services among trans-gender students.
Can someone explain why 176 trans respondents were insufficient for a separate analysis? I don't have much of a grasp on statistics. Is this related to statistical significance in calculating the adjusted odds ratio? Is it that they don't want to compare a gender identity to a sexual orientation? It seems that 176 individuals would be more than "insufficient" statistically, to at least contribute to their own analysis as a gender. This reminds me of how American Indian and Alaska Natives are left out of analysis for being insignificant or, literally, "Other"-ed.