MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122003326 · doi:10.1080/07399330500506485

Living With the Health and Social Inequities of a Disability: A Critical Feminist Study

2006· article· en· W2122003326 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia Bethune-Davies, Carol L. McWilliam, Hélène Berman

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Care For Women International · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealthcare innovation and challenges
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityFanshawe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHealth careEmbodied cognitionMedicineGerontologySocial isolationIsolation (microbiology)Face (sociological concept)NursingChronic diseasePsychologySociologyPolitical scienceFamily medicinePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clients living at home with chronic disabling conditions together with their caregivers, service providers, and policymakers face major challenges in optimizing health care. In this critical feminist interpretive study we examined the experiences of women receiving home care for chronic disabling conditions. Five themes emerged: struggling with the embodied limitations of disabling chronic conditions; actively seeking health; struggling with service limitations; seeking ways to manage; and living with isolation and marginalization. Having done this study, we learned that home care services do not always contribute sufficiently to the overall health and well-being of women living with chronic disabling conditions and, in fact, may negatively impact upon their health.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.029
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.374 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations14
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth Care For Women InternationalSame topicHealthcare innovation and challengesFrench-language works237,207