MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1494160450 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.29.1.7

“A Plea for the Prostate”: Doctors, Prostate Dysfunction, and Male Sexuality in Late 19th- and Early 20th-Century Canada

2012· article· en· W1494160450 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Christopher D O'Shea

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman sexualityMainstreamSexual functionNeurastheniaMasculinityPleaSexual misconductMedicineSexual dysfunctionGender studiesPsychologySociologyPsychiatryInternal medicinePolitical scienceCriminologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historical examinations of medical discourse concerning male sexuality have focused on the perceived linkage between masturbation and sexual neurasthenia. However, more tangible conditions such as prostatic hypertrophy were also linked to the sexual misconduct of young and old men. This paper examines both the medical discourse concerning prostatic hypertrophy and how the development of treatment was influenced by contemporary concerns with both sexuality and masculinity. It argues that mainstream doctors moved away from the Victorian preoccupation with the dangers of illicit sexuality and increasingly regarded the restoration of sexual function as being in the best interests of their patients. This view was particularly evident in their quest for an operative method that would cure prostatic hypertrophy while preserving potency.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0330.021
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.183 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207