The limitations of a negotiation model for perimenopausal women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The clinical negotiation model proposed by Katon and Kleinman (1981) puts culture at the very heart of the patient‐doctor relationship. As opposed to the asymmetric model that stresses an unequal power relationship between a dominant physician and a powerless patient, this transactional model suggests that we view the clinical encounter as the locus of a negotiation that takes place between two kinds of knowledge (lay and professional), and between two agendas: the doctor’s and the patient’s. According to such a model, the doctor is taught to listen to the patient’s own explanatory model of disease. Using an in‐depth analysis of clinical encounters between perimenopausal women and female physicians, and of separate interviews with individual doctors and patients concerning their respective explanatory models, this pilot study puts emphasis on both the limitations of a transactional model and on the strategies deployed by doctors for enhancing the credibility of hormonal replacement therapy.
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 | 0.041 | 0.081 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.028 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".