MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2099748873 · doi:10.12927/hcq..16475

SARS and Ethics

2003· article· en· W2099748873 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mark Bernstein

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare Quarterly · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioethicsEthical issuesCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Medical ethicsOutbreakResearch ethicsDiseaseMedicine2019-20 coronavirus outbreakEngineering ethicsSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Environmental ethicsPolitical scienceInfectious disease (medical specialty)PathologyLawPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SARS is a devastating disease that caused widespread morbidity and mortality, as well as tremendous fear and uncertainty across the global village. There are numerous challenging medical aspects of this disease. Methods required to control it also raised significant ethical challenges for decision-markers both in real time, and for the future. A group at the Joint Centre for Bioethics (JCB) at the University of Toronto formally explored the ethical dimensions of this outbreak. The author briefly reviews the analysis by the JCB group and further examines how bioethical principles and theories relate to the numerous ethical issues raised by SARS and the methods used in its containment.

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)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.048
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.048
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.052
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0140.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.537
Teacher spread0.358 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealthcare QuarterlySame topicEthics in medical practiceFrench-language works237,207