MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034856341 · doi:10.1207/s15327027hc1901_5

The Portrayal of Heart Disease in Mass Print Magazines, 1991—2001

2006· article· en· W2034856341 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Communication · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedia Influence and Health
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsCausationDominance (genetics)DiseaseHeart diseaseMedical literatureContent analysisPsychologyFrame analysisMedicineSociologyPathologyPolitical scienceSocial scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we discuss the portrayal of heart disease based on a content analysis of the highest circulating English-language magazines available in Canada and published in Canada or the United States in 1991, 1996, and 2001. It includes both manifest and latent content analysis. In terms of the manifest analysis, the findings indicate the dominance of the medical frame followed by lifestyle and social structural frames. The latent analysis reveals the following frames: (a) optimism about medicine; (b) medicine as "good" and, by contrast, the body as "bad"; (c) heart disease as an "attack"; (d) heart disease as an individual responsibility; (e) contradictory information; (f) male celebrity patients and doctors; and (g) prestigious medical doctors, journals, and institutions. The medicalized portrayal of heart disease as fear generating is considered. In addition, the lack of attention to social structural causation in contrast to current epidemiological findings is 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.874
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.259 · 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