Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents the results of an exploratory study into the health concerns of women in South Wales. The objective was to obtain information on the way in which women view their own health and the health issues that concern them. The research design replicated a study carried out in Canada by one of the authors. Sixty-five women were interviewed using a structured interview schedule. The core question on the interview schedule took respondents through a list of 68 health and social problems. They were asked to indicate whether they had been worried about or had experienced any of these problems in the previous 6 months. The results support the findings of the Canadian research that reproductive health is not central to women's health concerns. On the contrary, among the most frequently mentioned problems were tiredness, stress, headaches and arthritis. The most frequently mentioned social problem was worrying about money. Women linked their health concerns with other problems such as unemployment, problems combining child care and paid employment and worrying about money. These problems created stress and, in turn, stress either led directly to ill health or else helped to foster ‘unhealthy’ life styles. Women were aware of the possibly harmful effects on health of smoking or drinking, for example, but resorted to them in order to cope with their stressful lives. One of the main conclusions of the study is that it is essential to incorporate women's health concerns into the policy-making process. Women's main health concerns are related to the stressful nature of their lives and, particularly in South Wales, to poverty and unemployment. So-called unhealthy lifestyles are often a response to stress and enable women to cope. This needs to be taken into consideration by health promoters. Finally, more research is required into women's health concerns and their understanding of health and illness.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".