MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141990073 · doi:10.1177/104973200129118499

The Standpoint of Storyteller

2000· article· en· W2141990073 on OpenAlexaff
Arthur W. Frank

Bibliographic record

VenueQualitative Health Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEmpathy and Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimacyNarrativeStorytellingValue (mathematics)Sociology of health and illnessSociologyQualitative researchEpistemologyPsychologyAestheticsSocial psychologySocial sciencePolitical sciencePhilosophyLawHealth careLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The legitimacy of an interest in illness narratives that is therapeutic, emancipatory, and pre-occupied with ethics is defended in response to Atkinson's critique of this interest as a blind alley. The value of storytelling as complementary to story analysis is argued, and the importance of recognizing one's own standpoint is emphasized. The conclusion considers how qualitative methods can inform changing relationships between illness, health, medicine, and culture.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.060
Scholarly communication0.0140.018
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0090.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.485
GPT teacher head0.647
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Citations409
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQualitative Health ResearchSame topicEmpathy and Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207