MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984791996 · doi:10.1136/bmj.e539

Editorial sparks debate over when Canadian parents should be told the sex of an unborn child

2012· article· en· W1984791996 on OpenAlexaffabout
Barbara Kermode-Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnborn childSex educationPsychologyPolitical scienceLawPregnancyHuman sexualityGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An editorial published in the journal of the Canadian Medical Association on 16 January entitled “‘It’s a girl!’—could be a death sentence” has sparked debate in Canada about when it is appropriate to reveal the sex of an unborn child to prospective parents. In the editorial ( CMAJ , doi:10.1503/cmaj.120021) the journal’s interim editor in chief, Rajendra Kale, suggests that disclosure of the sex of an unborn child should be withheld until late pregnancy to prevent selective abortion of female fetuses. Dr Kale explains that he believes female feticide in Canada to …

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.060
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.060
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0190.022
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
GenreEditorial

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
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJSame topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207