MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894648739 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.235-112017

Despite Being “Known, Highly Promiscuous and Active”: Presumed Heterosexuality in the USPHS’s STD Inoculation Study, 1946–48

2018· article· en· W2894648739 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Erin Gallagher-Cohoon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsHeterosexualityDemographyHomosexualitySociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Sexually Transmitted Disease Inoculation Study of the United States Public Health Service (USPHS) was a short-term deliberate exposure experiment into the prevention of venereal diseases. Between 1946 and 1948, over 1,300 Guatemalan prisoners, psychiatric patients, soldiers, and sex workers were exposed to syphilis, gonorrhoea, and chancroid. USPHS researchers initially proposed hiring sex workers to "naturally" transmit venereal diseases to male subjects who would then be given various prophylaxes. The researchers were interested in studying the effectiveness of new preventative measures. In other words, the USPHS study was designed to transmit venereal diseases heterosexually from an "infected" female body to the men who, it was assumed, were sexually isolated subjects. However, the researchers did record instances of male-to-male disease transmission among their subject populations, instances that challenged the presumption of heterosexuality on which the study was based.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207