Bibliographic record
Abstract
Letters21 January 2020Physical Health of Women After Seeking Abortion ServicesDavid C. Reardon, PhDDavid C. Reardon, PhDElliot Institute, Springfield, Illinois (D.C.R.)Search for more papers by this authorAuthor, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/L19-0623 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail TO THE EDITOR:I read Ralph and colleagues' article (1) with interest. Any student of the social sciences knows that no reliable conclusions can be drawn from a self-selected minority of participants (31%), especially when more than one half of that group (55%) drops out during the study. However, this is just 1 of many problems with the Turnaway Study, which in its most recent incarnation asserts that abortion has no measurable effects on women's physical health (1).The self-selection bias inherent in the Turnaway Study's design is further aggravated by the fact that women who expect to have the ...References1. Ralph LJ, Schwarz EB, Grossman D, et al. Self-reported physical health of women who did and did not terminate pregnancy after seeking abortion services. A cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2019;171:238-47. [PMID: 31181576]. doi:10.7326/M18-1666 LinkGoogle Scholar2. Reardon DC. The abortion and mental health controversy: a comprehensive literature review of common ground agreements, disagreements, actionable recommendations, and research opportunities. SAGE Open Med. 2018;6:2050312118807624. [PMID: 30397472] doi:10.1177/2050312118807624 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar3. Reardon DC, Ney PG, Scheuren F, et al. Deaths associated with pregnancy outcome: a record linkage study of low income women. South Med J. 2002;95:834-41. [PMID: 12190217] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4. Østbye T, Wenghofer EF, Woodward CA, et al. Health services utilization after induced abortions in Ontario: a comparison between community clinics and hospitals. Am J Med Qual. 2001 May-Jun;16:99-106. [PMID: 11392176] CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5. Reardon DC, Thorp JM. Pregnancy associated death in record linkage studies relative to delivery, termination of pregnancy, and natural losses: a systematic review with a narrative synthesis and meta-analysis. SAGE Open Med. 2017;5:2050312117740490. [PMID: 29163945] doi:10.1177/2050312117740490 CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAffiliations: Elliot Institute, Springfield, Illinois (D.C.R.)Disclosures: The author has disclosed no conflicts of interest. The form can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=L19-0623. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoSelf-reported Physical Health of Women Who Did and Did Not Terminate Pregnancy After Seeking Abortion Services Lauren J. Ralph , Eleanor Bimla Schwarz , Daniel Grossman , and Diana Greene Foster Physical Health of Women After Seeking Abortion Services Lauren J. Ralph , Eleanor Bimla Schwarz , Daniel Grossman , and Diana Greene Foster Physical Health of Women After Seeking Abortion Services Kurt S. Elward Metrics Cited byPost-abortion contraception: how to make the right choice? 21 January 2020Volume 172, Issue 2Page: 163-164KeywordsCase seriesConflicts of interestDeath ratesDisclosureElectronic medical recordsEmotionsPopulation statisticsPregnancy ePublished: 21 January 2020 Issue Published: 21 January 2020 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2020 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".