MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Politics of Population Policy in the Islamic Republic of Iran

2000· article· en· W1973272197 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Family Planning · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamic republicIslamPoliticsPopulationPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsSocioeconomicsEconomic growthMedicineGeographyEnvironmental healthEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Islamic Republic of Iran arguably has one of the most successful family planning programs in the developing world. This success is all the more interesting for advocates of population programs because the political leaders of the Islamic regime were once strongly opposed to family planning. Indeed, after gaining power following the 1979 revolution, they were responsible for dismantling Iran's relatively new family planning program and introducing pronatalist policies. This article provides an account of the different phases of the population policy in Iran and examines the diverse elements that led politico-religious leaders to revise their views about fertility control and to participate in creating a workable family planning program. The complex formal and informal strategies that the political experts, the media, the religious authorities, and the government of the Islamic Republic adopted in order to achieve this about-face are described. The analysis is based on data collected by the first author during anthropological field research in 1993-96, by means of informal interviews with officials, with medical personnel, with family planning clients, and with religious leaders.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.329 · 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