MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1511588230 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.19.1.201

Designing for “the Little Convalescents”: Children's Hospitals in Toronto and Montreal, 1875–2006

2002· article· en· W1511588230 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Innovations
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionPostmodernismArchitectureHistoryFamily medicineSociologyMedicineSocial scienceArtLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores more than a century of changing ideas about the health of Canadian children through the architecture of pediatric hospitals in Montreal and Toronto. As a unique source in the history of medicine, hospital architecture reveals three distinct phases in the construction of children as patients. Early 20th-century children's hospitals remained bastions of older spatial attitudes towards health. The postwar hospital was self-consciously modern, with an arrangement more scientific and institutional than its predecessor. Through reference to other typologies, the postmodern hospital marks a curious return to the earlier attitude that children's health is a family affair. Is the hospital a home for children or an institution for science?

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.227
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