Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Aim : The present era witnesses new biomedical technologies of which the usage has brought about philosophical, moral, religious and social challenges. More questions, challenges and uncertainties in biotechnology have made applied ethics, as a part of its ethics and philosophy, to investigate the issue and find relevant appropriate solutions based on ethical principles and theories. Materials and Methods : The current study aimed at casting light on bioethics and its scope using primary and authentic sources on bioethics and seeking the related keywords in these sources. Ethical Considerations : The principles of research ethics have been observed in studies and citing the primary texts and sources. Findings : Providing an all-inclusive definition of bioethics and its place in different disciplines of ethics, this short discussion tackles the area, realm, and significance of the issues in bioethics. Technologies such as assisted reproductive, in vitro fertilization (IVF), human and animal cloning, obtaining stem cells and using them, euthanasia, and manufacture of human organs and their transplantation are the most challenging matters for which within bioethics, the fundamental answers and strategies against the questions and challenges of their emergence are elaborated. Conclusion : Bioethics is a new area of interest in applied normative ethics which, as an interdisciplinary, examines systematically the moral challenges coming from biological science and medical innovations and organizes the must-to-dos in this connection. The realm of bioethics comprises distinction of consequences of applying modern biomedical technologies against the ethical principles and standards within human life. The aforesaid technologies and advancements that make up issues in bioethics are grouped in four categories: Life preserver technologies at the beginning of life and during it; Life lasting technologies to promote the life quality; Reproductive and esp. cloning technologies; Technologies associated with genetic engineering and gene therapy. Citation: Rahbarpour MR. Meaning and Conception of Bioethics and its Realm. Bioeth Health Law J . 2017; 1(1):1-9.
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 | 0.023 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.091 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".