MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008763674 · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.10.002

The legal effects of fetal monitoring guidelines

2009· article· en· W2008763674 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard M. Dickens, Rebecca J. Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Malpractice and Liability Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)AmbivalenceCompliance (psychology)MedicineSet (abstract data type)LawPolitical sciencePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' (ACOG) monitoring guidelines introduce a new category of interpretation of fetal heart rate tracings between reassuring and nonreassuring, namely intermediate. The purpose is to reduce unnecessary cesarean deliveries. The legal role of medical guidelines is ambivalent. Providers are expected to be familiar with such guidelines, but also to exercise clinical judgment in their patients' interests. Practice departing from guidelines requires justification, but simple compliance without regard to patients' circumstances may constitute negligence. Some courts defer to medical professional guidelines, but others hold that professional standards are set as a matter of law, not by the profession itself. Unlike conclusions in medical science, which are open to continuing review, courts determine facts in a case only once, at trial. Litigation to compel patients' compliance with medical advice based on guidelines may fail, as may prosecutions, more common in the US, of patients who defy such advice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.111
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.896

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.111
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.406 · 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.

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicMedical Malpractice and Liability IssuesFrench-language works237,207