MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2920989162 · doi:10.1002/ca.23365

From shame to fame: The improbable career of the great anatomist‐surgeon D. Hayes Agnew

2019· article· en· W2920989162 on OpenAlexaff
James R. Wright

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Anatomy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHistory of Medical Practice
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePaintingArt historyMedical schoolWifePortraitArtLawPolitical scienceMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

David Hayes Agnew began his career as a country doctor in rural Pennsylvania in 1838. After a 3-year diversion as a partner in a large ironworks business that went bankrupt in 1846, Agnew, seriously in debt, returned to the medical profession in Cochranville, PA, hoping to focus on surgery. Recognizing that he needed to improve his knowledge of anatomy, he purchased cadavers from Philadelphia and dissected at home in his spare time. When he was finished dissecting, he covertly moved bodies to a nearby pond so he could later collect skeletons after eels had removed the remaining soft tissues. This worked well until Agnew and the townspeople found out that a local fisherman, known for selling the most delicious eels, fished exclusively from this pond. Agnew was asked to leave Cochranville and he moved to Philadelphia, where he purchased the Philadelphia School of Anatomy and worked as a surgeon at Blockley Hospital. During the Civil War, he became renowned for his ability to manage gunshot wounds. Agnew was upwardly mobile in Philadelphia, becoming one of America's most prominent 19th-century academic surgeons. When President James Garfield was shot by an assassin, Agnew was called to care for him. When he retired from his position as the John Rhea Barton Professor of the Principles and Practice of Surgery at the University of Pennsylvania, the medical students hired the famous American realist painter, Thomas Eakins, to produce The Agnew Clinic, which became one of the artist's two most important paintings. Clin. Anat. 32:661-671, 2019. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0120.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0050.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.318 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical AnatomySame topicHistory of Medical PracticeFrench-language works237,207