MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140072472 · doi:10.1177/1049732309358326

Fathers: Locating Smoking and Masculinity in the Postpartum

2010· article· en· W2140072472 on OpenAlex

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicParticipatory Visual Research Methods
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsMasculinityPhotovoiceThematic analysisHarmPsychological interventionEthnographyPsychologyGender studiesDevelopmental psychologyQualitative researchSocial psychologySociologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many fathers mitigate the harm of their smoking by physically separating their smoking from their children and child care activities.The aim of this study was to empirically locate smoking and masculinities by detailing the highly gendered nature of the everyday places where fathers smoke. A masculinities framework was used to interpret interview and photovoice data drawn from an ethnographic study of fathers who smoke. Twenty participants completed individual interviews and contributed a total of 308 photographs to illustrate smoking through the eyes of fathers. The data were analyzed to describe the locations and contexts that facilitate and restrict participants' smoking. Three thematic findings-smoking on the job, the bifurcated domestic sphere, and solitary confinement-were drawn from the analyses to provide insights about when and where smoking does and does not occur, and offer direction for father-centered tobacco reduction interventions.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativehigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Qualitativehigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.225
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.2250.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.914
GPT teacher head0.794
Teacher spread0.120 · 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