MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1507432354 · doi:10.1111/cob.12000

Qualitative content analysis of online news media coverage of weight loss surgery and related reader comments

2012· article· en· W1507432354 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Obesity · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)MedicineContent analysisTone (literature)Social mediaMedia coverageMass mediaPerspective (graphical)Social psychologyMedia studiesPsychologyAdvertisingLinguisticsSociologySocial scienceLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The media has the ability to affect public opinion and policy direction. Prevalence of morbid obesity in Canada is increasing; as is the only effective long-term treatment, weight loss surgery (WLS). Limited research has explored media re/presentations of WLS. The purpose of this study was to examine national online news coverage (and reader comments) of WLS using content analysis. We sought to understand the dominant messages being conveyed within the news texts and reader comments, specifically whose voice was represented, who was the intended audience and what was the overall tone. Articles and comments were retrieved from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation news web site and analysed using line-by-line techniques. Articles were predominantly 'positive/supportive' (63%) in tone and frequently presented the voices and opinions of 'experts' conveying a biomedical perspective. Comments were overwhelmingly 'negative' (56%) and often derogatory including such language as 'piggy' and 'fatty'. Comments were almost exclusively anonymous (99%) and were frequently directed at other commenters (33%) and 'fat' people (6%). The potentially problematic nature of media framing and reader comments, particularly as they could relate to weight-based stigmatization and discrimination is discussed.

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 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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.453
GPT teacher head0.584
Teacher spread0.131 · 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