Consent Requirements for Pelvic Examinations Performed for Training Purposes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2010, The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada (SOGC) and The Association of Professors of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of Canada (APOG) released an updated policy statement regarding pelvic examinations performed on women under anesthesia. The updated statement, unlike the previous 2006 guideline that applied to “medical trainees” (explicitly including students and residents), for the most part only applies to “medical students”. Pelvic examinations conducted for training purposes presumably constitute a battery in law, subject to the defence of consent. Residents need to be covered by an SOGC and APOG policy statement regarding pelvic examinations for training purposes with the same requirements that the updated statement establishes for medical students.
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 | 0.124 | 0.252 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.026 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.019 |
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".