PSYCHIATRIC CARE IN ONTARIO'S ASYLUMS IN A COMPARATIVE CONTEXT, 1890-1910
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries marked a number of significant changes in psychiatric care worldwide.A few critics have argued that care was segmental, inefficient and detrimental to those it intended to serve.The field was quickly "losing professional credibility" (J.Duffin, History of Medicine, 285) as poorly trained clinicians could not find answers to the "maladies that are the triumph of the quack, religious or otherwise" (The Bulletin of Ontario Hospital for Insane).It can be argued that the infantilized mode of care administered by those within and outside asylum walls hindered any efforts for recovery as it created a cloud of dependency and anxiety.The interplay between various social, political and cultural factors and their relative impact on treatment make it all the more interesting as a period of research and study.This paper will explore the contemporary nature of the asylum as it relates to the travels of two physicians utilizing The Bulletin of the Ontario Hospital for the Insane for the period between 1894 and 1911.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".