MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2023730869 · doi:10.1215/15476715-2005-018

Caring For/Caring About: Women, Home Care, and Unpaid Caregiving; Nobody's Home: Candid Reflections of a Nursing Home Aide

2006· article· en· W2023730869 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Eileen Boris

Bibliographic record

VenueLabor Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and Caregiving
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsnobodyNursing homesNursingGerontologyPsychologyMedicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Book Review| May 01 2006 Caring For/Caring About: Women, Home Care, and Unpaid Caregiving; Nobody's Home: Candid Reflections of a Nursing Home Aide Caring For/Caring About: Women, Home Care, and Unpaid Caregiving Karen R. Grant, Carol Amaratunga, Pat Armstrong, Madeline Boscoe, Ann Pederson, and Kay Willson, eds. Aurora, Ontario: Garamond, 2004 208 pp., $24.95 (Canadian) (paper) Eileen Boris Eileen Boris Search for other works by this author on: This Site Google Labor (2006) 3 (2): 138–140. https://doi.org/10.1215/15476715-2005-018 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Tools Icon Tools Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Eileen Boris; Caring For/Caring About: Women, Home Care, and Unpaid Caregiving; Nobody's Home: Candid Reflections of a Nursing Home Aide. Labor 1 May 2006; 3 (2): 138–140. doi: https://doi.org/10.1215/15476715-2005-018 Download citation file: Zotero Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search Books & JournalsAll JournalsLabor Search Advanced Search The text of this article is only available as a PDF. Labor and Working-Class History Association2006 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLabor Studies in Working-Class History of the AmericasSame topicIntergenerational Family Dynamics and CaregivingFrench-language works237,207