MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143053332 · doi:10.1300/j013v41n04_06

The Role of the Media in Public Participation: Framing and Leading?

2005· article· en· W2143053332 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wilfreda E. Thurston, Erin Rutherford, Lynn M. Meadows, Ardene Robinson Vollman

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen & Health · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsHealth CanadaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)Political sciencePublic relationsHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on the framing of women's health services in the context of restructuring dictated by health system regionalization. By examining the archives of a local newspaper and the minutes and documents of one of the key organizations involved in restructuring after regionalization, it was possible to examine the public discourse of the time and subsequently the journalists' and the readerships' understandings of women's health. The evidence suggests that the Salvation Army was instrumental in setting the tone that was taken by the media in framing the issues around the closure and move of its Grace Women's Health Centre. While the Calgary Health Region was successful in bringing the Grace under its mandate and organizational control, it was the Salvation Army, with its highly visible and powerful fundraising arm and its advocacy for holistic women's health that caught the public's attention. The internal discourse tracked some of the emerging issues, known only to those involved at managerial levels within the health system, but the public discourse kept women centered in decisions regarding the partnership. Women from many constituencies must continue to participate in the public policy realm to ensure that women's health remains an issue in health reform.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen & HealthSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207