MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027164522 · doi:10.1177/1359105307071746

A Bitter Pill

2006· article· en· W2027164522 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Psychology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomedicineDistressPillPsychologyDepression (economics)PsychiatrySocial psychologyPsychotherapistSociologyMedicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Taking a discourse analytic approach, this article explores how a biomedical understanding is drawn on and mobilized in women's accounts of their depressive experiences. Through talk of diagnosis, and by drawing comparisons between depression and physical illnesses, participants constructed depression as a medical condition with the effect of validating their pain and legitimizing their identities. However, participants' accounts also indicated an uneasy fit between the objective discipline of biomedicine and their subjective experiences of depression. Without tangible evidence to validate the 'reality' of their condition, speakers were on precarious ground for talking of themselves and their distress within a biomedical frame. The social construction of biomedicine and stigma for marginalized forms of distress are discussed.

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.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.581
Teacher spread0.451 · 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