MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136383738

Emergency contraceptive options available for adolescents.

2006· article· en· W2136383738 on OpenAlexaff
Vishal Gupta, Ran D. Goldman

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPillEmergency contraceptionMedicinePregnancyFamily planningFamily medicineChild bearingIntrauterine deviceAlternative medicineGynecologyObstetricsMedical emergencyPopulationResearch methodologyNursing
DOInot available

Abstract

QUESTION: A 16-year-old female patient came into a clinic seeking consultation after unprotected coitus. What treatments are available if this patient does not want to continue with a pregnancy? ANSWER: Teen pregnancy is a substantial problem. Several emergency contraceptives exist, including the combined pill, the progesterone-only pill, and copper-bearing intrauterine devices. While many teenagers are unaware of these options, this armamentarium is very effective if used early after coitus and when further sexual activity is avoided for a few days.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: aff_core · design weight: 5595.24 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: other
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Clinical question-and-answer piece on emergency contraception options for adolescents; the object is patient care.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

The article provides clinical guidance on emergency contraception rather than studying research practice.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: editorial/commentary
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Clinical Q&A on emergency contraception options for adolescents.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0660.008

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207