MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088827718 · doi:10.12927/hcpol.2013.23597

Exploring Stigma by Association among Front-Line Care Providers Serving Sex Workers

2013· article· en· W2088827718 on OpenAlex
Rachel Phillips, Cecilia Benoit

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueHealthcare policy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFront lineHealth careStigma (botany)Front (military)SociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceMedicineLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stigma by association, also referred to as "courtesy stigma," involves public disapproval evoked as a consequence of associating with stigmatized persons. While a small number of sociological studies have shown how stigma by association limits the social support and social opportunities available to family members, there is a paucity of research examining this phenomenon among the large network of persons who provide health and social services to stigmatized groups. This paper presents results from a primarily qualitative study of the work-place experiences of a purposive sample of staff from an organization providing services to sex workers. The findings suggest that stigma by association has an impact on staff health because it shapes both the workplace environment as well as staff perceptions of others' support. At the same time, it is evident that some staff, owing to their more advantaged social location, are better able to manage courtesy stigma than others.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.284 · 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