MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2270300381

The Case Against the Medicalization of Female Genital Mutilation

2004· article· en· W2270300381 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
C. Nana Derby

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian women's studies · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicalizationSocioeconomic statusColonialismFemale circumcisionGender studiesPopulationSociologyMedicinePolitical scienceDemographyPsychiatryGynecologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Contrary to claims by some scholars that as a category was non-existent in pre-colonial African societies (Oyewumi) historical analyses of their practices and traditions indicate otherwise. The otherness of woman relative to men in pre-colonial Africa is reflected still today in womens location in traditional and religious practices. The continued practice of female genital mutilation (FGM) which emerged in Egypt and spread across the continent some two thousand years ago (Nour; Bonvillain) is among the most harmful of these traditions. Movement activities against FGM date back to the seventeenth-century (Dorkenoo). Since then these activities have been somewhat successful in creating awareness both within and beyond domestic borders of the negative socioeconomic and psychological impacts of FGM but the process has been fraught with difficulties and the goal of eliminating FGM is yet to be realized. One of the many obstacles facing activism against female genital mutilation today is its medicalization which legalizes the practice and permits medical doctors to perform the procedure. This article reiterates the negative impact of FGM on womens health and well-being and examines the socioeconomic implications of its medicalization. (excerpt)

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.047
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0090.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian women's studiesSame topicFemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting IssuesFrench-language works237,207