The work of French surgeons in disseminating obstetrics in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth in the 18th century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the second half of the 18th century giving birth was a perilous process in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, partly since obstetrics was not yet a recognised subject. The abolition of the Jesuit Order, which was quite influential in the field of education, provided a good opportunity to reassess the Commonwealth’s educational system. As a result, the Commission of National Education was created, leading to major reforms, especially in the field of medicine. However, because of the lack of specialists in the Commonwealth, it was necessary to search for teachers abroad. Obstetrics was already well developed at that time in France, and the French physicians Pierre Maignan and Nicolas Regnier distinguished themselves by disseminating this science in the Commonwealth. Pierre Maignan was the first person to teach obstetrics at the School of Surgery in Warsaw. But more is known about Nicolas Regnier. In 1775, thanks to his efforts, the first department of childbirth in Lithuania was established, and in 1781 he took charge of the departments of the theory of medicine and obstetrics at the School of Medicine in Vilnius. His lessons demonstrate the knowledge and practices of surgery and obstetrics in the last quarter of 18 century. Pierre Maignan and Nicolas Regnier were pioneers in obstetrics in the Commonwealth. Moreover, they were a good example of the fertile scientific cooperation between France and Poland-Lithuania in the 18th century.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".