Maternity Care Providers’ Perceptions of the Implications of Birth and Gestation Tourism for Patients, Health Care Providers, and the Canadian Health Care System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates maternity care providers’ perceptions of birth tourism and international gestational preconception arrangements (i.e., surrogacy). A convenience sample of 136 maternity care providers from Alberta and British Columbia completed our online survey. Respondents reported consequences of both practices, including redirection of Canada’s health care resources from local citizens, ramifications for the integrity of the immigration system, socio-economic consequences for the health care system and care providers, and health risks for mothers and infants. Of the respondents, 30.6% somewhat disagreed and 31.3% strongly disagreed with awarding citizenship by birth in Canada, 81.4% stated that birthright citizenship legislation should be modified, and 80.0% stated that Canada should disallow foreign nationals from paying women living in Canada to gestate, give birth, and surrender children to foreign nationals. Further research is necessary to quantify the scope and implications of birth tourism and international gestational preconception arrangements and to determine whether these implications justify amendment to current legislation.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".