Entre la «Revanche» et la «Veillée» des berceaux: Les médecins québécois francophones, la mortalité infantile et la question nationale, 1910–40
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article analyzes the discourse of a Québécois medical elite, comprising primarily public health physicians and pediatricians, concerning infant mortality between 1910 and 1940. It emphasizes its similarities with nationalist discourse, and the fact that nationalist ideology provided doctors with arguments to justify the staggeringly high infant mortality rate experienced by their compatriots and encouraged them to glorify the high birthrate of French Canadians. According to the medico-nationalist discourse, the high birthrate (or "Revanche des berceaux") would even have been an obstacle to their struggle against infant mortality (or their "Veillée"). The legendary fecundity of French-Canadian women, a myth that is historically questionable, could thus explain, at least partially, the fact that public health measures adopted in Quebec during this period were less stringent than in Ontario, the "sister province" that Quebec's hygienists took nonetheless as their point of reference.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".