MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2483691693 · doi:10.4081/mem.2003.663

Abortion in the world: statistical update (for thirty countries) with particular attention for United States of America

2003· article· en· W2483691693 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ermenegildo Spaziante

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicina e Morale · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDignityAbortionPopulationPolitical scienceLawGeographyDemographySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of procured abortion is still very actual. The Author has continued to outline the planetary dimensions, and now refers to a statistical study of the incidence of the abortion phenomenon in the United States of America. The placing of the U.S.A in the classification of the incidence of induced abortion within thirty countries of the world is identified, in relation to the natal rate and the consistency of the population. The comparison of the statistical data of the last twenty years among the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and Italy is presented.
 A specific examination is made for the 50 States of the USA from a statistical point of view, and as a comparative analysis of some socio-economic factors. A significant framework emerges of the analogies and differences between the various States of the USA Federation.
 The Author presents some ethical and social considerations, wishing for a programmed intervention that is co-ordinated and efficient to contain this “sore of the social body”, as well as the perspective that the USA, which has suffered historically from the serious problem of slavery, should spread the ideal of freedom and human dignity in the world. It is also hoped that there can be a similar movement towards a higher respect, and greater and more systematic help for the new life, as a subject for the recognition as a conceived human being with the natural right to the protection of its life, for progress in the civil and humanitarian conscience.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.321
Teacher spread0.295 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicina e MoraleSame topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207