MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067549965 · doi:10.1093/shm/15.2.229

Curing the Colonizers: Highland Hydrotherapy in Guadeloupe

2002· article· en· W2067549965 on OpenAlexaffabout
Edward T. Jennings

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial History of Medicine · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismIndigenousCreole languageHistoryGerm theory of diseaseEthnologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Ancient historyGeographyArchaeologyMedicineEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores attempts by French colonial doctors in Guadeloupe to treat tropical pathologies with water and altitude cures, between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries. Assuming that high morbidity rates in the Caribbean were caused by the area's inherent 'toxicity', Europeans turned to mineral water and high-altitude spas, both for the reinvigoration of settlers and to 'season' new arrivals. Guadeloupean spas, though utilized by indigenous, black, creole, and white Guadeloupeans alike, soon emerged as replicas of France in the tropics, and served the socio-medical function of immersing the colonial body in familiar waters. The French obsession with 'healthful space' led to the creation of an 'administrative' quarter precisely in the region of Guadeloupe's spas around Basse- Terre (actually the highest part of the island). The arrival of germ theory in the nineteenth century did not fundamentally alter the rationale for water and altitude cures in Guadeloupe. Tracing the history of these 'folk-cures'--often admonished by colonial doctors as 'common sense', but in reality an integral part of the tropical medical canon--sheds light on some of the underlying dynamics, tensions, and continuities of French imperial medicine.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.009
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial History of MedicineSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207