MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982491469 · doi:10.1783/0000000052972933

Debating late abortion: time to tell the truth

2005· article· en· W1982491469 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ellie Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbortionLawMedicineQuarter (Canadian coin)Abortion lawPopulationSociologyFamily planningPregnancyPolitical scienceResearch methodologyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

No one can have escaped the recent media interest in abortion. A striking aspect of the discussion so far has been the role of those who have provoked the debate by arguing for a reduction in the legal time limit for abortion yet who describe themselves as ‘pro-choice’. Professor Stuart Campbell the obstetrician who runs a London clinic that provides four-dimensional ultrasound images to women during pregnancy contends he is a firm supporter of legal abortion but has been arguing for an upper limit of 18 weeks with 12 weeks for ‘social abortion’. American feminist Naomi Wolf has concluded that the current 24- week time limit is ‘too generous’. Sir David Steel architect of the 1967 Abortion Act has made the most significant intervention contending the limit should be 22 weeks with 12 weeks for most abortions. The apparent wish on the part of opinion from this quarter to reopen the time limits discussion suggests the debate may gain further momentum. (excerpt)

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health CareSame topicAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyFrench-language works237,207