MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045422789 · doi:10.1080/00379816.2010.506786

Nurses' Voices from the Archives

2010· article· en· W2045422789 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Graham Thurgood

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Society of Archivists · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOral historyContext (archaeology)Local historyFootballEntertainmentWork (physics)SilenceSocial history (medicine)LeagueHistoryNursingSociologyMedicinePolitical scienceArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The West Yorkshire Nursing Oral History Collection (WYNOHC) provides a valuable local history resource relating to general nurses working within hospital and community settings in the two West Yorkshire towns of Halifax and Huddersfield. Little is known about the historical development of the nursing profession in these towns, reflecting a relative gap in the literature about provincial and regional nursing histories and the lives and work of ‘ordinary’ nurses. The WYNOHC, located at the University of Huddersfield Archives, therefore provides a valuable source of information.1 [1] The University of Huddersfield Archives contain other oral recordings from the Rugby Football League, Asian Voices, Theatre and Two Minutes Silence projects. However, the richness of the data provides for a wider audience than just nurses, as it contains historical details not only of nursing and health care but places these within the social context of the twentieth century with information about nurses' family life, education, religion and social activities. The nurses discuss their childhood and school years as well as their work experiences, which provide details of the local history of the towns with examples of public transport, the introduction of the motor car, shopping and entertainment.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.766
Threshold uncertainty score0.721

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Society of ArchivistsSame topicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesFrench-language works237,207