MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166967669 · doi:10.1177/1557988311409022

Beyond Ballistics

2011· review· en· W2166967669 on OpenAlex
Lisa Wenger

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Men s Health · 2011
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBallisticsAeronauticsMedicineMedical emergencyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the literature on men's help seeking offers important insights into health service engagement patterns within this population, there remain gaps in our understanding. In addition to insufficient attention to a range of male experiences and a restricted focus on sex-specific or associated diseases, much of the extant work is limited by insufficient attention to how men navigate needs and supports across illness and a narrow conceptualization of the core concept of help seeking. Specifically, as research focuses on masculinity as a determinant of the decision to seek medical help (emphasis on prediction), less is known about how men, as gendered beings, are experiencing help seeking over the course of illness (emphasis on understanding). In this article, it is argued that research on men's help seeking can benefit from the integration of a dynamic conceptualization of help seeking that is considerate of shifting needs and a diversity of supports and which emphasizes the subjective, interactive, and ongoing patterns in how men are perceiving, interpreting, and responding to the challenges of illness.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.327 · 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