MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3043159102 · doi:10.1002/ijgo.13307

Transsexuality: Legal and ethical challenges

2020· article· en· W3043159102 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard M. Dickens

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGender dysphoriaTransgenderMedicineHostilityOppressionBirth certificateLawGynecologyGender studiesPoliticsPolitical scienceClinical psychologySociologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sex-change procedures, better described as gender-change procedures, involve preparing patients psychologically and surgically for gender transition to treat their gender dysphoria. Physical treatment might include hysterectomy for female to male transition, and post-castration fashioning of an artificial vagina for male to female transition. Conservative opposition to accommodating and recognizing such procedures remains in some countries, and where treated, transgender individuals might face social hostility and oppression. However, human rights laws increasingly provide for transgender non-discrimination and government re-issue of official documents such as birth certificates and social insurance cards in the changed gender. A UK legal decision required a transgendered male who retained his ovaries and uterus to be registered as mother on the birth certificate of the child he bore. Most challenging are decisions on adolescents' requests for gender transition, especially over parents' objections. Laws increasingly recognize that legal minors with sufficiently evolved intellectual and emotional capacity can make decisions for themselves.

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)0.073
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0730.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0200.060
Scholarly communication0.0160.012
Open science0.0040.012
Research integrity0.0180.037
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Gynecology & ObstetricsSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207