MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911983329 · doi:10.3138/jcs.52.3.2017-0082.r2

Explaining Abortion Policy Developments in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island

2018· article· en· W2911983329 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Rachael Johnstone

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbortionDecriminalizationGeographyHistoryLawPolitical scienceEthnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The landscape of abortion access in Canada has undergone major changes in the last two years, especially in the Maritime provinces. Long heralded as the worst provinces in Canada in which to find oneself in need of an abortion, Prince Edward Island and New Brunswick represent holdouts to the creation of substantive abortion access in Canada: no services have been available on Prince Edward Island since 1982, while New Brunswick, in response to the decriminalization of abortion in 1988, created onerous restrictions on the circumstances in which the procedure could be accessed under medicare. These barriers to access were so longstanding that they seemed to be a permanent feature of access in Canada. That is, until, in a few short years, virtually all of these barriers were lifted. Using the multiple streams approach (MSA), this article attempts to explain why these changes came about when they did, and how they were able to take effect so rapidly.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.967

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.307 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207