MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1641752666 · doi:10.1126/science.313.5784.155b

Ethical Oocytes: Available for a Price

2006· article· en· W1641752666 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gretchen Vogel

Bibliographic record

VenueScience · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDonationEconomic shortageOocyte donationFoundation (evidence)Embryonic stem cellEthical issuesPolitical scienceBusinessLawEngineering ethicsBiologyEngineeringOocyteGeneticsGovernment (linguistics)EmbryoPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TORONTO, CANADA—Obtaining human oocytes for embryonic stem (ES) cell experiments raises tricky ethical issues. Researchers want to be sure the donation is voluntary and that women are well-informed of the risks—two areas in which now-discredited stem cell researcher Woo Suk Hwang was faulted. At a recent meeting here, Ann Kiessling, director of the Bedford Stem Cell Research Foundation in Somerville, Massachusetts, described her group's successful efforts to recruit donors. Despite a rigorous screening process that eliminated more than 9 of 10 potential donors, the team had no shortage of oocytes. “We ran out of funds before we ran out of donors,” she says. Nevertheless, her experience suggests that collecting hundreds of oocytes ethically and safely will be expensive and slow.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2980.125

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.314 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations23
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScienceSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207