Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fritz Dross, Krankenhaus und lokale Politik 1770–1850: Das Beispiel Düsseldorf , Essen: Klartext, 2004. Pp. 400. €24.90. ISBN 3–89861–257–0. ‘Only the sick are poor’. This quotation from Dr Christoph Wilhelm Hufeland in 1809 sets the stage for this innovative examination of the provision of health care in Düsseldorf from 1780 to 1850. Fritz Dross argues that historians have often failed to examine the relationship between sickness and poverty, despite the fact that in the minds of nineteenth-century observers there was an obvious link between the two. By separating these themes, we inhibit our understanding of how small hospitals were transformed into substantially larger institutions by the mid-1800s. Dross is not interested in viewing the creation of the institution simply as a medical phenomenon consisting of doctors, patients, new methods of treatment and power relations. Instead, he is much more eager to reveal the functions the hospital and Krankenhaus was intended to serve while illuminating the rationale underlying changes made to the provision of medical care during the 80 years he examines. He contends that at each stage of its growth the primary institution responsible for providing medical care represented much more to the general public than a place where the sick could go to receive treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".