MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1572924571 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.22.2.271

Passion and Profession, Doctors in Skirts: The Letters of Doctors Frieda Fraser and Edith Bickerton Williams

2005· article· en· W1572924571 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Katherine L. Perdue

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPassionPrejudice (legal term)Face (sociological concept)Identity (music)Power (physics)Human sexualitySociologyArt historyMedicineLawPsychologyHistoryArtGender studiesAestheticsPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Passion and Profession; Doctors in Skirts," is based on the extensive correspondence between Dr. Frieda Fraser and Dr. Edith Bickerton Williams, two Canadian women who were lovers from 1924 and life partners from 1937, until the death of Dr. Williams in 1979. Dr. Fraser became a prominent researcher and lecturer of Microbiology at the University of Toronto. Dr. Williams was one of the first women in North America to graduate as a Veterinarian. Dr. Frieda Fraser's medical training afforded her the freedom to foster a same-sex relationship with her partner Edith. Her freedom was constrained however, as women interns were placed in institutions thought appropriate for their sex, and prospects of private practice for a woman doctor were bleak. The letters' candid accounts of conflicts with male authority, challenges to ideas about sexuality, and the pervasiveness of prejudice, often reinforced by the scientific community, are important to the History of Medicine. The paper demonstrated that the same-sex relationship and identity, developed in the course of the Fraser/Williams correspondence, proved a primary source of strength in the face of the doctors' tribulations and triumphs as professionals in the medical field.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0270.017
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0100.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesFrench-language works237,207