MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335710580 · doi:10.1891/1062-8061.19.15

Hell in the Family: Married Women and Madness Before Institutionalization at the St-Jean-de-Dieu Asylum, 1890 – 1921

2011· article· en· W2335710580 on OpenAlex

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueNursing History Review · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpouseInstitutionalisationMentally illPleadingDistressPsychiatryMental healthMedicineSociologyPsychologyGender studiesLawPolitical scienceMental illnessPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Research in Montreal's St-Jean-de-Dieu Asylum archives has revealed a number of letters from family members and local physicians pleading for asylum care for married women between 1890 and 1921. When added to other admission documents in patients' medical files, these letters allow an intimate glimpse into private lives of families and highlight the pain and distress of dealing with mentally ill people in the home before the introduction of community mental health services. Far from easily abandoning a spouse or mother, close-knit French Canadian families struggled until they could no longer cope before seeking help. To comply with asylum regulations, family members (primarily husbands, who were often illiterate) and local physicians were required to justify their applications for admission, but they did so in different ways.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.551
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.254 · 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