Class‐based masculinity, cardiovascular health and rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Men in economically advanced societies are more at-risk of dying prematurely due to heart disease than women, and this risk is inversely related to their socioeconomic status (SES). While the strong influence of socioeconomic factors on self-management of chronic diseases is important, the impact of masculinity must also be considered. This study examines the social variation in preventive health lifestyles of men from two contrasting socioeconomic groups who have suffered from a cardiovascular incident requiring hospitalization. It draws chiefly on Pierre Bourdieu's sociocultural theory of the practice (habitus and symbolic violence). Qualitative data was collected through 60 in-depth, semi-structured interviews with Canadian men (average age 57.3). Results indicate that participants from both socioeconomic groups share aspirations towards personal fulfilment (achieving a sense of security, preserving autonomy and gaining social recognition) after their heart incident, but apply different strategies in pursuit of these aspirations that have distinctive effects on healthy lifestyles. This study emphasise the importance of drawing on theoretical approaches in public health that have the potential to combine universal with context-specific views of human experience in order further understand health and lifestyle inequalities.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".