MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121269494 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v6n4p226

Women's Empowerment in Iran: A Review Based on the Related Legislations

2014· review· en· W2121269494 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Roksana Janghorban, Ali Taghipour, Robab Latifnejad Roudsari, Mahmoud Abbasi

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Education, and Development Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentEconomic growthPopulationPolitical scienceWork (physics)SalientBusinessPublic relationsMedicineLawEngineeringEnvironmental healthEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women's empowerment can be defined as a change in the circumstances of a woman's life, which enables her to raise her capacity to manage more enriched and rewarding life. Improvement in women's empowerment is a salient issue to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. National laws are influential factors in promoting women's empowerment. Lack of awareness of legal and constitutional provisions and failure to recognize it, is a factor that hinders the process of empowerment. This paper provides a review based on Iranian legislations which have considered various aspects of women's empowerment. Although this work has specifically dealt with women's needs, it encompasses a right-based approach to women's empowerment suggested by the United Nations Fund for Population Activities. However, there is still a great need for further inquiries in the area of legislations concerning women's empowerment around the world in general and Iran in particular.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.348 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicGender, Education, and Development IssuesFrench-language works237,207