MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233762855 · doi:10.22215/etd/2015-10685

Third-Party Reproduction: Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Commodification and Biopolitics

2015· dissertation· en· W4233762855 on OpenAlexaffabout
Bojana Bogeljic

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommodificationBiopowerCommercializationAssisted reproductive technologyContext (archaeology)ReproductionReproductive technologyPolitical scienceProfit (economics)Reproductive rightsEconomic growthGeographyEconomySociologyEconomicsReproductive healthLawEcologyBiologyInfertilityDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to investigate the issues that arise in Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) through cross-border reproductive travel, the global trade in ova and the contracting of surrogates.The concern is around the commercialization and commodification of women and children, as well as the risks associated with the global for-profit ART industry.The project is divided into three case studies.First, the Canadian ART context shows that restrictive federal policy is challenged by transnational ART.The second case study reveals that international online fertility networks are created and located opportunistically in destination countries where surrogates and egg donors can be recruited.The last case study reveals a trend in some destination countries towards more restrictive ART legal frameworks.In conclusion, this thesis argues that the patterns of cross-border ART are shaped by government regulations and the local availability of egg donors and surrogates.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.296 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207