MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1881734457 · doi:10.4000/ahrf.4912

Othmar KEEL, L'avènement de la clinique moderne en Europe 1750-1815, Montréal, Presses Universitaires de Montréal, 2001, 542 p.

2003· article· fr· W1881734457 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean-Luc Chappey

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales historiques de la Révolution française · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeelArtHistoryArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Déjà connu pour ses études sur l'histoire de la médecine (travaux sur Cabanis en particulier), Othmar Keel nous offre ici une synthèse riche et décapante des différentes thèses qu'il défend depuis plusieurs années. Prenant le contre-pied des interprétations traditionnelles (Foucault, Ackerknecht) concernant la naissance de la médecine clinique, il met en cause le rôle joué par l'institutionnalisation et le personnel de l'École de santé de Paris créée en 1794 dans le processus d'émergence de ...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.009
Science and technology studies0.0050.011
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.229 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales historiques de la Révolution françaiseSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207