MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385957674 · doi:10.1051/e3sconf/202341201057

Medically assisted procreation: A new legal framework to overcome infertility in Morocco in the context of energy optimization

2023· article· en· W4385957674 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aziza Ghallam, Leila Bouasria, Hayat Zirari

Bibliographic record

VenueE3S Web of Conferences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicReproductive Health and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislatorDirectiveContext (archaeology)Quarter (Canadian coin)Work (physics)ReproductionInfertilityQualitative researchPolitical scienceField (mathematics)LawSociologyMedicineLegislationGeographyEngineeringSocial scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After more than a quarter of a century of the practice of medically assisted procreation (MAP) in Morocco in the absence of a legal framework, the Moroccan legislator passed Law 47-14, in April 2019, to make up for the considerable delay in the field of medically assisted procreation. Through this research work, we aim to explore the field of application of this law and demonstrate its contributions to the lives of couples aspiring to motherhood and fatherhood in order to achieve their parenthood project within the couple. From a methodological point of view, this research is based on the qualitative analysis of semi-directive interviews conducted with infertile couples having recourse to (AMP) and practitioners of this medical technique. One of the key findings of this work is that there are major differences between the provision of medically assisted reproduction services in the public and private sectors, and between insured and uninsured couples.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.290 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueE3S Web of ConferencesSame topicReproductive Health and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207