MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2184991567 · doi:10.5040/9780567694751.0022

Muslim Women Having Abortions in Canada

2022· book-chapter· en· W2184991567 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ellen Wiebe, Roya Najafi, Naghma Soheil, Alya Kamani

Bibliographic record

VenueT&T Clark eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInduced AbortionsObstetricsPolitical scienceGender studiesMedicineDemographySociologyPopulationFamily planningResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective To improve understanding of the attitudes, beliefs, and experiences of Muslim patients presenting for abortion. Design Exploratory study in which participants completed questionnaires about their attitudes, beliefs, and experiences. Setting Two urban, free-standing abortion clinics. Participants Fifty-three self-identified Muslim patients presenting for abortion. Main outcome measures Women’s background, beliefs, and attitudes toward their religion and toward abortion; levels of anxiety, depression, and guilt, scored on a scale of 0 to 10; and degree of pro-choice or anti-choice attitude toward abortion, assessed by having respondents identify under which circumstances a woman should be able to have an abortion. Results The 53 women in this study were a diverse group, aged 17 to 47 years, born in 17 different countries, with a range of beliefs and attitudes toward abortion. As found in previous studies, women who were less pro-choice (identified fewer acceptable reasons to have an abortion) had higher anxiety and guilt scores than more pro-choice women did: 6.9 versus 4.9 ( P = .01) and 6.9 versus 3.6 ( P = .004), respectively. Women who said they strongly agreed that abortion was against Islamic principles also had higher anxiety and guilt scores: 9.3 versus 5.9 ( P = .03) and 9.5 versus 5.3 ( P = .03), respectively. Conclusion Canadian Muslim women presenting for abortion come from many countries and schools of Islam. The group of Muslim women that we surveyed was so diverse that no generalizations can be made about them. Their attitudes toward abortion ranged from being completely pro-choice to believing abortion is wrong unless it is done to save a woman’s life. Many said they found their religion to be a source of comfort as well as a source of guilt, turning to prayer and meditation to cope with their feelings about the abortion. It is important that physicians caring for Muslim women understand that their patients come from a variety of backgrounds and can have widely differing beliefs. It might be helpful to be aware that patients who hold more anti-choice beliefs are likely to experience more anxiety and guilt related to their abortion than pro-choice patients do.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueT&T Clark eBooksSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207