MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040107498 · doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.07.032

Hymen reconstruction: Ethical and legal issues

2009· article· en· W2040107498 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca J. Cook, Bernard M. Dickens

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirginity testHymenShameHumiliationHonorPsychologyCriminologySocial psychologyLawPolitical scienceMedicineVagina

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A hymen may be ruptured by sexual intercourse and several other means. In cultures prizing unmarried women's virginity, premarital rupture may shame a woman, and her family. Women, including brides whose virginity is not proven at marriage, face humiliation, ostracism, divorce, and violence-at the extreme, "honor" killing. Nevertheless, gynecologists may oppose hymen reconstruction on grounds that it is deceptive, not medically required, or that the requirement of evidence of virginity discriminates against women and the procedure supports holding them to higher standards of virtue than are required of men. Gynecologists may justify the procedure, however, as serving health, which includes patients' mental and social well-being and women's human rights to control their own bodies. Further, many adolescents lose their virginity innocently, by rape or coercion, and, without hymen reconstruction, women may face violence and even death. The procedure is usually lawful, and distinguishable from female genital cutting or mutilation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.007
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.311 · 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicFemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting IssuesFrench-language works237,207