MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W14640287

Legal duties to respect abortion choices.

2003· article· en· W14640287 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard M. Dickens

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbortionReferralMedicineThreatened abortionFamily medicineLawBusinessPolitical sciencePregnancy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses legal protection of individual choices to obtain abortion services, to decline to perform abortions on grounds of religious objection, and to participate in these procedures. It considers legal duties to respect women as decision-makers in their own lives, including when they decide to continue pregnancy. The choice to decline participation in abortions is an aspect of religious freedom available to physicians, nurses, and, for instance, pharmacists, but not artificial legal persons such as hospital and clinic corporations. Refusal does not extend to ancillary functions such as serving meals, routine pre-operative and post-operative care of abortion patients or typing abortion referral letters. Physicians practising in proximate care must be trained in appropriate medical management of incomplete and threatened abortion even when they would refuse to apply such techniques to induce abortion.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.018
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→