MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969601535 · doi:10.1353/bhm.2002.0099

Seeing Is Believing?: The Form and Substance of French Medical Debates over Lourdes

2002· article· en· W1969601535 on OpenAlexaff
Jason Szabo

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the history of medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPilgrimageCredibilityPoliticsAuraThe RepublicSociologyReligious studiesLawSocial psychologyPsychologyAestheticsHistoryPolitical sciencePsychiatryPhilosophyEpistemologyAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent works on Lourdes have tended to emphasize the positive personal, social, and spiritual aspects of a pilgrimage, while downplaying the role of religious politics in (over)determining discussions around the events taking place there over the course of the Third Republic. This paper seeks to reassert the extent to which the medical community remained divided, along religious lines, over the existence and nature of the cures taking place at Lourdes well into the twentieth century, while analyzing how Catholic physicians were able to create an aura of therapeutic credibility around the cures.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.038
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.167 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations37
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of the history of medicineSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207