MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323356010 · doi:10.3138/cjhs.2022-0046

Later Gestational Age Abortion in Canada: A Scoping Review

2023· review· en· W4323356010 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Carly Demont, Anvita Dixit, Angel M. Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Contraception
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public HealthImmunoPrecise (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbortionMedicineMedical abortionFamily medicineReproductive healthHealth carePregnancyObstetricsMisoprostolEnvironmental healthPopulationPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the decriminalization of abortion in Canada in 1988, there have been no legal restrictions on when in pregnancy an abortion can take place. However, abortion care is only consistently available in Canada up to 23 weeks and 6 days; women, transgender men, and gender non-binary individuals who need abortion care after 24 weeks typically obtain services in the United States. Furthermore, abortion care beyond 16 weeks is unavailable in some regions of the country. The authors undertook this scoping review to explore what is currently known about later gestational age abortion in Canada. Using a six-stage framework, they identified 32 relevant sources that were published in the last 30 years, and they consulted with seven topic experts to validate the findings from our document synthesis. The limited body of literature on abortion after 16 weeks in Canada sheds light on the safety of both medical and instrumentation procedures, the type and training of abortion-providing clinicians, the characteristics of those obtaining abortion care after the first trimester, and geographic disparities in service availability. These topic experts emphasized the need for future research on patient experiences and developing and implementing strategies to help provinces and territories expand abortion care to later gestational ages and improve comprehensive reproductive health services.

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 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)0.003
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.551
Threshold uncertainty score0.959

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.196
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Human SexualitySame topicReproductive Health and ContraceptionFrench-language works237,207