MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386950979 · doi:10.32388/umxj76

Review of: "Biological Parenthood and Reproductive Technologies"

2023· peer-review· en· W4386950979 on OpenAlexaff
Mirela David

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReproductive technologyBiologyPregnancyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Potential competing interests: No potential competing interests to declare.The last thing women who struggle with infertility need is yet another male author telling them their only chance of having a baby reinforces patriarchy.Infertility is a disease and I find the argument that ARTs reinforce patriarchy weak.The author should reconsider his argument.In fact it is well known that infertile women living in patriarchal societird suffer great ostracism, social and family pressures to produce offspring especially male offspring.What is wrong with Assisted reproductive technologies in terms of democratizing access to them is the prohibitive cost for many people in countries or provinces or states where insurances do not cover costs and even in countries where 1 IVF cycle is funded more cycles are needed for successful live birth.In some cases people can spend thousands of dollars or tens of thousands of dollars until they achieve a live birth because these technologies do not guarantee anything and it takes several tries to be successful.The author argues that preference for biological parenthood is problematic.That is for each individual to decide what type of parenthood they prefer.If an LGBT couple wants biological ties with their offspring why is that problematic?In certain countries LGBT people cannot legally adopt, in other countries adoption is difficult because not enough people are in the system, for example in the province where I live Saskatchewan a law was passed for indigenous children in the system to rightfully be placed with indigenous communities first.This however has created a vacuum in the local adoption system and there are currently no children to adopt (with wait lists of many years), therefore the only way to adopt for nonindigenous couples is international adoption which also carries costs.For these couples maybe IVF is an answer especially if they suffer from infertility, but such treatments can help them.The author also argues that biological parenthood reinforces patriarchy.For millions of mothers who are having children these days and for fathers that help out with baby care this is a problematic argument.According to the author one should no longer have biological children because it reinforces patriarchy.If fathers would help out with baby care, bottle feeding and other household tasks that would not be the case, and many fathers these days do step up.If the author thinks breastfeeding reinforces patriarchy probably the author has not heard of pumping which allows the mother to extract the milk so that other household members for instance the father can feed the baby.It's most used to keep up milk supply for instance in the US by women who go back to work after 2-3 months because of short maternity leave but who want to continue feeding the baby breastmilk.Also, formula feeding is quite acceptable these days and many women do not breastfeed.Less and less women stay at home.This argument is also outdated.In many countries for instance former socialist countries in Eastern Europe mothers have always gone back to work after giving birth.They now have access to

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.144
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.144
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0040.004
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0840.029

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207