MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125869582 · doi:10.16995/ntn.636

The Patient’s Pain in Her Own Words: Margaret Mathewson’s ‘Sketch of Eight Months a Patient, in the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, A.D. 1877’

2012· article· en· W2125869582 on OpenAlexaff
Mary Wilson Carpenter

Bibliographic record

Venue19 Interdisciplinary Studies in the Long Nineteenth Century · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeSketchMedicineHistoryLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been commonly assumed that nineteenth-century hospital patients were objectified, silenced, treated as the 'accident' of their disease, to use Michel Foucault's term, and also that as charity patients they were largely illiterate paupers, and consequently did not write accounts of their hospital experience. One such account has been known, however, since the 1970s, when W. B. Howie and S. A. B. Black published two articles in medical journals on Margaret Mathewson's 'Sketch of Eight Months a Patient, in the Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, A.D. 1877'. Martin Goldman subsequently published excerpts from the 'Sketch' in Lister Ward (1987). But Mathewson's account of her experience as a surgical patient of Joseph Lister has never been published in its entirety, nor has it been known that the two existing copies of the manuscript differ extensively, as Mathewson decided to leave out 'some insignificant items and put in others more interesting' in the later version. Admitted because Lister thought he could save her arm from amputation by excision of her tuberculous shoulder joint, her narrative vividly details what it was like to be a surgical patient in Scotland in 1877. Her revisions to that narrative provide clues as to what she thought prudent to exclude from her account, after friends had asked her to publish it. As a charity patient, she was subordinated to the hospital staff, expected to wait uncomplainingly and to accept whatever treatment was given. But her 'Sketch' reveals such unexpected and surprising information as the willingness of the staff, including Lister himself, to teach her and other patients about the nature of their disease and also how to care for themselves, especially how to change their own dressings. Even more startling, Mathewson's narrative documents her confrontation of a 'cruel dresser', a medical student whom she believed to be deliberately causing her pain when he changed her dressing and manipulated her arm, and Lister's corroboration that the patient had the right to report such maltreatment. Mathewson's 'Sketch' narrates her progress from identification as an 'interesting' case to 'successful' and even 'favourite' case; and her movement from one subordinated to medical authority to one who speaks - and acts - on her own behalf.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.004

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.319 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue19 Interdisciplinary Studies in the Long Nineteenth CenturySame topicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207