MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2359921903 · doi:10.1097/ans.0000000000000121

A Decolonizing Methodology for Health Research on Female Genital Cutting

2016· article· en· W2359921903 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Werunga, Sheryl Reimer‐Kirkham, Carol Ewashen

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Nursing Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting Issues
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPraxisSubjectivityFeminismIntersectionalityGender studiesSociologyNarrativeInclusion (mineral)Context (archaeology)ConsciousnessCritical consciousnessHuman sexualityPostcolonialism (international relations)PsychologyEpistemologyPedagogyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, critical perspectives including postcolonial feminism, African feminism, and intersectionality are presented as having decolonizing methodological potential whereby the Western narrative surrounding the practice of female genital cutting, particularly in the context of migration, is reexamined. In addition, multiple intersecting influences on affected women's realities are accounted for and a critical consciousness that serves to inform praxis, address social determinants of health, and promote health equity is encouraged. The inclusion of an African feminist perspective, a traditionally marginalized critical perspective, serves to further decolonize some long-held erroneous beliefs about the sexuality, subjectivity, and embodiment of the African woman.

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)0.141
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.138
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1410.138
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.005
Science and technology studies0.0080.058
Scholarly communication0.0090.011
Open science0.0040.013
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.309
GPT teacher head0.588
Teacher spread0.280 · 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
DomainMethods
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Nursing ScienceSame topicFemale Genital Mutilation/Cutting IssuesFrench-language works237,207