Abortion in the world: statistical update (for thirty countries) with particular attention for United States of America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.021 | 0.041 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.007 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".