MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156664441 · doi:10.46692/9781447321873.022

Patient safety: a moral panic

2015· other· en· W2156664441 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
William James Fear

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoral panicPanicPatient safetyPsychologySocial psychologyPsychiatryPolitical scienceAnxietyCriminologyHealth careLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction This chapter introduces a new subject into the moral panic literature – patient safety – and in doing so explores the ways in which moral panics around patient safety have been used by physicians as part of a deliberate strategy in order to bring about institutional transformation. It is important to note that the term ‘moral panic’ has a much longer lineage than is commonly thought to be the case. It first appeared in the Quarterly Christian Spectator in 1830, and then again in The Journal of Health Conducted by an Association of Physicians in 1831. In this journal, a French physician visiting Sunderland (in England) praised the English government for its approach to the cholera epidemic. He congratulated the government for not surrounding the town with a cordon of troops which as ‘a physical preventive would have been ineffectual and would have produced a moral panic far more fatal than the disease now is’ (unknown, 1831, p 180). The term was picked up much later, in 1964, with the Canadian sociologist Marshall McLuhan's ground-breaking work on the influence of the media, and later expanded by Jock Young (1971) and Stan Cohen (1972). Given the historical nature of the phenomenon, it seems both unrealistic and unlikely to assume that moral panics are inherently media driven. However, it seems equally realistic and likely to assume that the media plays, at times, a key role, as we will see in the case-study examples that follow. The chapter focuses on two case-study examples, anaesthesia as a specific medical intervention and healthcare more broadly, noting that there are many more possible cases of which ‘injury to the person’ is a subfield that could have been considered, including, for example, automotive safety, consumer-product safety and medical insurance. Moral panic and institutionalism A moral panic may be described simply as a perceived threat to society and its cultural values, based on a hitherto unacknowledged or taboo subject. There may be a perceived individual, group or class of individual who is held to be responsible for the threat, usually portrayed in the media as ‘folk devils’; those who identify the threat are often known as ‘moral entrepreneurs’ (Cohen, 1972).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.058

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.020
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0090.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCrime, Deviance, and Social ControlFrench-language works237,207