MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978055320 · doi:10.3917/jib.204.0095

Chapitre 7. The Influence of American Bioethics in Canada

2009· article· fr· W1978055320 on OpenAlexaffabout
John R. Williams

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal international de bioéthique et d éthique des sciences · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioethicsFormative assessmentPolitical scienceSociologyEnvironmental ethicsLawPhilosophyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The history of bioethics in Canada has yet to be written. When that happens, an important issue to be considered will be the influence of American bioethics. In what follows, I offer some suggestions to the author of the history about what should be included. I will limit my discussion to the formative years of 1970-2000 and leave later developments for another occasion. My article will be structured as follows: individuals, institutions, issues, bioethics education and a conclusion.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.004

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal international de bioéthique et d éthique des sciencesSame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207