MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7128473370 · doi:10.64903/1480-6800-26.3-4.316

Development and Fertility Decline in the Arabian Gulf Cooperation Council Countries: The Case of the United Arab Emirates

2023· article· W7128473370 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fayez M. Elessawy

Bibliographic record

VenueArab world geographer · 2023
Typearticle
Language
FieldMedicine
TopicGlobal Maternal and Child Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFertilityTotal fertility rateSocioeconomic statusWork (physics)Sub-replacement fertilityDeveloping country

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arabian Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, and Oman have developed rapidly since the second half of the 20 th century, due to the increase of oil and gas revenues. The governments invested in major projects, which aimed at building the countries’ infrastructure, economy, and people. The GCC countries completely transitioned from traditional into advanced societies reaching high levels on the Human Development Index. Such development has contributed to fertility declines. In 1995, fertility rates were very high with 6.5 children per woman in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Oman, but in 2022 fertility rates declined threefold among them to less than 2 children per woman in all the GCC countries except Saudi Arabia (2.4) and Oman (2.7). The main objective of the research is to show the effect of some socio-economic factors on the decline in fertility rates of the GCC countries using historical and topical approaches. In addition, analytical techniques are used to analyze two questionnaires conducted in 2005 and 2020 to determine the effects of socioeconomic factors such as marital age, education, work status, and income on declining fertility in the United Arab Emirates.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.255
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArab world geographer→Same topicGlobal Maternal and Child Health→French-language works237,207→