Bibliographic record
Abstract
Circumstances surrounding the physical condition of the critically ill, the injured, and the dying make the conduct of qualitative research particularly difficult. Assumptions embedded in qualitative research are challenged or no longer apply: As sick people, participants are unfamiliar with their everyday worlds, and they are often incapable of describing their conditions and perceptions, so that researchers have difficulty obtaining data to comprehend, interpret, and generally conduct their research. Methodological problems extending from the participants' condition include the lack of everyday language to describe their experiences, the instability of the participants' reality, and the instability of the self. When researching participants who are sick, these methodological problems result in decisions about the timing of data collection, challenges to validity and reliability, and debates about who should be conducting this research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.656 | 0.727 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".