MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rates of Induced Abortion in Iran: The Roles of Contraceptive Use and Religiosity

2008· article· en· W2082422785 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Family Planning · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryNipissing University
FundersMinistry of Health and Medical Education
KeywordsAbortionReligiosityFamily planningFertilityMedicineTotal fertility rateDemographyPopulationUnsafe abortionObstetricsPregnancyEnvironmental healthResearch methodologyPsychologySocial psychologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Iran has experienced a dramatic decline in fertility in recent decades, but limited access to legal abortion continues to lead many women whose pregnancies are unwanted or mistimed to undergo clandestine, unsafe abortions. No official data on the abortion rate in Iran have been collected, however. This study uses the 2000 Iran Demographic and Health Survey to estimate the abortion rate for the country as a whole and for specific regions, and to explore the role of contraceptive use and religiosity in explaining regional variations in abortion rates. We estimate the total abortion rate for the country to be 0.26 abortions per married woman, and the annual general abortion rate to be 7.5 abortions per 1,000 married women aged 15-49. We find that the negative effect of modern contraceptive use on the abortion rate is 51 percent greater than the negative effect of religiosity, and we highlight the implications of these findings for policies on reproductive health and family

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.239

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.217
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.184 · 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