MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086139482 · doi:10.5505/tjob.2019.99389

General Comment No. 22 (2016) on the Right to Sexual and Reproductive Health (Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights)

2019· article· en· W3086139482 on OpenAlex
Gürkan Sert, İrem Narman, Oktay Erkan, Özge Emre, Ebru Özden, Naz Tursun, Yunus Başar

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTurkish Journal of Bioethics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Human Rights and Reproductive Law
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReproductive healthCultural rightsCovenantSexual and reproductive health and rightsReproductive rightsSociologyPolitical scienceGender studiesEconomic growthHuman rightsEconomicsFundamental rightsLawDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was signed by Turkey in 2000 and has been in force since September 23rd, 2003. For this reason, the Covenant is considered as act of parliament in our domestic law, and unlike the general procedure of application of the law, it can not be alleged to contradict the Constitution (According to Article 90 of the Turkish Constitution). The article 12 of the Covenant defines the right to health and its content. In the article 12 of the Covenant, in its General Comment No. 14 published in 2000, the right to the highest attainable standard of health was interpreted and commented upon. This document contains a detailed description of the right to health, its content, and its obligations to State parties. Although this Comment of the Covenant is not binding, it is a document to which the State parties refer when taking measures related to health services. Every publication and comment on the right to health was based on the General Comment 14 of the Covenant. The Article 12 was reinterpreted by the Covenant on May 2nd, 2016 in the context of rights to sexual and reproductive health. İit has been emphasized that legal, procedural, practical and social barriers limit the access of individuals to full range sexual and reproductive health services. It has also been pointed out that accessibility of sexual and reproductive health services is a distant target for women and girls. Moreover, it has been stated that discrimination that increases exclusion in legislation and practice limits lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) individuals and disabled people'senjoyment of sexual and reproductive health rights. For this reason, it is stated that although commenting on the rights of sexual health and reproductive health is included in 14 comments, it is important to make an interpretation about them. This comment is an interpretation of a binding Convention. Therefore; It is a document that will provide guidance on measures to be taken by States Parties in respect of their rights to sexual health and reproductive health. At the same time, obstacles to discrimination in medical practice bring important approaches in terms of respect for autonomy and respect for private life. In our article, information about the content of the ESKHK's interpretation and possible reflections of this content in the field of medical law and ethics will be given.

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.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.299 · 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