Archives and Artifacts / Archives et artefacts de la pratique médicales: Les enquêtes des coroners du district de Québec, 1765-1930 : une source en histoire médicale et sociale canadienne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Creee en Angleterre en 1194, la fonction de coroner, charge d’enqueter sur les morts violentes et suspectes, est instauree officiellement en 1764 au Canada (Quebec et Montreal). De 1765 a 1930, plus de 16 000 enquetes sont tenues et redigees dans le district de Quebec, conservees aujourd’hui a Bibliotheque et Archives nationales du Quebec, Centre d’Archives de Quebec. Une base de donnees a ete creee pour faciliter l’acces a l’information pour toutes les personnes s’interessant aux coutumes passees, a la medicalisation de la societe, a l’attitude face a la mort, a la criminalite, a l’impact de l’industrialisation, aux nouveaux modes de production. Cette communication resume les elements importants de cette base de donnees : l’historique de la fonction de coroner, la description de la source, et la relation entre les enquetes des coroners et les evenements sociaux, economiques et historiques de la region de Quebec. The coroner’s office, created in England in 1194 to hold inquiries into suspicious or violent deaths, was established in Quebec and Montreal in 1764. From 1765 to 1930, more than 16,000 reports, housed in the provincial National Library and Archives, were documented for the district of Quebec. A database was created to facilitate access for those interested in past customs, in provision of medical care, in attitudes towards death, in crime, in the effects of industrialization, and in new ways of production. This paper summarizes the most important elements of this database, gives a chronological account of the office of the coroner, describes the documents, and show the connection between the inquiries of the coroners and the socioeconomic events of the region.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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.
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".