MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067581768 · doi:10.5172/conu.12.1.92

A feminist analysis of the menopause discourse

2002· review· en· W2067581768 on OpenAlexaff
Charlotte Loppie, Barbara Keddy

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Nurse · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFocus Groups and Qualitative Methods
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMenopauseProject commissioningNursingSociologyGender studiesPublishingMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Menopause has been viewed as a medical condition which needs to be treated. The discourse surrounding the process reflects a positivist paradigm without acknowledgement of the lived experiences of women who have been given conflicitng information. In this paper we write about the dilemmas faced by peri menopausal, menopausal and post menopausal women as they grapple with the issues that focus on 'symptoms', rather than a natural phenomenon. We point out that the 'science' of menopause is class, race and gender biased as we present a feminist analysis of the concerns facing mid life women.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.227
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary NurseSame topicFocus Groups and Qualitative MethodsFrench-language works237,207