MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015235732 · doi:10.1177/0883073808321763

From Eugenic Euthanasia to Habilitation of ``Disabled'' Children: Andreas Rett's Contribution

2009· article· en· W2015235732 on OpenAlexafffund
Gabriel M. Ronen, Brandon Meaney, Bernard Dan, Fritz Zimprich, W Stögmann, Wolfgang Neugebauer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Child Neurology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsRett syndromeEugenicsHabilitationNazismPsychologyPsychiatryPsychoanalysisLawPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the name of Andreas Rett is familiar to many from his eponymous neurogenetic syndrome, his other achievements involving the care of disabled children deserve special attention. His tireless advocacy helped to bring fundamental changes in the medical and societal attitude toward disabled individuals in a city that had recently seen more than 7500 disabled children and inmates of psychiatric hospitals actively euthanized by National Socialist (Nazi) decree. Most notably, this study demonstrates the remarkable changes that can be achieved single-handedly by a vocal and energetic physician. Yet at the same time, several instances are recorded in which Rett appeared to prioritize his own professional advancement at the expense of truthful disclosure of his own past, as well as that of some of his close associates. Dr Rett's professional life and contributions, now 10 years after his death, presents a compelling object lesson for neurologists and others involved in the care of the disabled.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.013
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations23
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Child NeurologySame topicMedical History and ResearchFrench-language works237,207