MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984928218 · doi:10.1001/amajethics.2019.988

What Are Good Guidelines for Evaluating Uterus Transplantation?

2019· article· en· W2984928218 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Margaret Horvat, Ana S. Iltis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe AMA Journal of Ethic · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInfertilityTransplantationUterusClinical PracticeGynecologyMedicineEthical issuesIntensive care medicineObstetricsEngineering ethicsPregnancyNursingSurgeryBiologyInternal medicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advances in uterus transplantation (UTx) suggest it is on a trajectory toward becoming an accepted clinical practice to treat absolute uterine factor infertility (AUFI). Additional uses have been envisioned but not studied. UTx programs thus far have relied largely on ethical frameworks associated with clinical research, surgical innovation, organ transplantation, and assisted reproductive technologies, as reflected in the Revised Montreal Criteria and the Indianapolis Consensus. This article argues that it is time to develop integrated guidelines that incorporate existing evidence, acknowledge and address tensions among the ethical frameworks that have informed judgments of UTx for AUFI thus far, identify and address ethical questions on which existing frameworks are silent, and anticipate future ethical issues in UTx research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.100
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.281
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.100
Threshold uncertainty score0.529

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1000.281
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0120.008
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.014
Open science0.0100.005
Research integrity0.0130.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.499
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AMA Journal of EthicSame topicOrgan and Tissue Transplantation ResearchFrench-language works237,207