MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417537123 · doi:10.1080/23293691.2025.2589202

Femtech and the Paradoxes of Empowerment: A Critical Conceptual (Re)View

2025· article· en· W4417537123 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen s Reproductive Health · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Realism in Sociology
Canadian institutionsFanshawe CollegeWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubject (documents)Field (mathematics)Context (archaeology)Component (thermodynamics)Work (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Femtech is a rapidly expanding industry consisting of consumer digital health technologies designed to enhance women’s health. The recent rise of critical femtech scholarship reflects growing concerns about the industry’s promises of user empowerment in the face of ill-equipped regulatory and legal frameworks, shifting reproductive rights legislation, and the structural need for improved women’s healthcare. Using a diffractive reading approach, this article offers a critical conceptual (re)view of such literature and traces how these threats to empowerment are situated across disciplinary perspectives, raising timely concerns about digital and commercial influences on health, reproductive justice, and menstrual justice.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.009
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.392 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen s Reproductive HealthSame topicCritical Realism in SociologyFrench-language works237,207