The Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris and Its Role in the Beginnings of Modern Rheumatology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the early hours of the morning of August 31, 1997, Diana, Princess of Wales, was a passenger in a Mercedes-Benz being driven at high speed through the fashionable 8th Arrondissement of Paris. Passing through a tunnel along the Seine River, the vehicle ran into a wall. An ambulance took her to the decidedly unfashionable 13th Arrondissement, where she was pronounced dead about 2 hours later at La Salpetriere Hospital. La Salpetriere, or saltpeter works (intriguing name for a hospital!), the largest hospital in Paris, has a fascinating history. About 400 years ago, an arsenal for the manufacture of munitions was relocated to the present Salpetriere site from across the river. Since gunpowder is largely a mixture of sulfur and saltpeter (KNO3), the site was referred to as the saltpeter works. This appellation has been applied to the successive institutions that have stood on this site, and persists to this day. Under Louis XIV, who reigned from 1643 to 1715, a large proportion — estimated as high as 10% — of the Paris population of 400,000 were homeless beggars. They were not just underprivileged, they had nothing: no money, no honest way to earn money, nothing to eat, nowhere to live. They were dressed in rags. Of course they had some alternatives: crime, begging, prostitution, and suicide. All these alternatives were employed. Clearly, this situation had the potential for major social disorder. At the same time, the middle of the 17th century saw the rise of concern for the poor, spearheaded by the efforts of St. Vincent de Paul. His influence, combined with the perceived need for greater social stability, prompted the King in 1656 to remove undesirable members of society from the streets by sheltering them in grand settings1. His motivation: “to put an end to …
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".