Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter contributes to the formulation of the principle of informed consent in the Nigerian National Health Act (NHA) and the Code of Medical Ethics (CME). It examines whether the NHA offers a rule of informed consent built around the foundational principle of patient autonomy, which both empowers patients to be the decision-makers in matters concerning their healthcare and treatment, and invests them with the right to demand information relevant to their medical care. The chapter explains the classes of information that may be subsumed under the informed consent rule. It discusses the operation of the medical professional standard of disclosure in Nigeria and highlighted the standards operative in the UK, US, and Canada. The chapter argues that the omission of a mandatory duty to disclose the patient&s;s health status because of the notion of patient&s;s best interests, which is loosely used in the Act, can significantly interfere with patient autonomy.
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 | 0.047 | 0.138 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.042 |
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".