MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170835196 · doi:10.3109/10826084.2010.527419

Conceiving Risk, Divergent Responses: Perspectives on the Construction of Risk of FASD in Six Countries

2011· article· en· W2170835196 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laurie A. Drabble, Nancy Poole, Raquel Magri, Nazarius Mbona Tumwesigye, Li Q, Moira Plant

Bibliographic record

VenueSubstance Use & Misuse · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological interventionPublic healthIntervention (counseling)Environmental healthPregnancyChinaPsychologyMedicineFetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderDeveloping countryPsychiatryGeographyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conceptualizations of risks related to women's alcohol use during pregnancy, and the attendant response to preventing fetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD), are examined in six countries: the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Uganda, Uruguay, and China. Considerable differences were found in how risks were conceptualized across countries and in contextual factors that influence research, prevention, and intervention efforts. Differences in conceptualizations were also apparent within countries. Differences also existed in the degree to which the issue of drinking during pregnancy has been minimized or amplified and in whether and how responses are linked to treatment or other public health interventions.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.036
Scholarly communication0.0110.009
Open science0.0010.013
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations41
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSubstance Use & MisuseSame topicPrenatal Substance Exposure EffectsFrench-language works237,207