Public perception on infertility and its treatment: an international survey
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first large survey on the public perception of infertility and its treatment was conducted in six European countries, the USA and Australia. A representative sample of 8194 adults was polled, using standard validated methodology. The results obtained highlighted the following major aspects: (i) infertility is perceived as a disease by less than half of the people surveyed (38%), in contrast to the accepted medical opinion; (ii) awareness about the definition and incidence of infertility is relatively low, despite the fact that half of the people polled claimed to know someone affected by infertility; (iii) close to 90% of the adults surveyed knew about in-vitro fertilization (IVF), but less than one-quarter of them knew about the chances of success of this assisted reproductive technology; and (iv) when confronted with the knowledge that the cost of three IVF cycles is roughly equivalent to the cost of a hip replacement (a commonly reimbursed procedure), a large majority (70%) of the individuals interviewed agreed that IVF should be reimbursable.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it