MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415985680 · doi:10.1007/s10551-025-06167-7

Ethical Dilemmas of Disability Inclusion—Emerging Ethics of Activism and Care: Introduction to the Special Issue

2025· article· en· W4415985680 on OpenAlexaff
Oana Branzei, Anica Zeyen, Susanne M Bruyère, Eline Jammaers, Nidhi Singal, Gregor Wolbring

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Business Ethics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDisability Rights and Representation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness ethicsGratitudeQuality of Life ResearchResearch ethicsEthical issues

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wolbring also discusses ableism in relation to emerging technologies and governance, anti-environmentalism and climate change, governance, transhumanism, enhancement medicine

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.018
Scholarly communication0.0150.014
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0140.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.339 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Business EthicsSame topicDisability Rights and RepresentationFrench-language works237,207