“Everything Possible Is Being Done”: Labour, Mobility, and the Organization of Health Services in Mid-20<sup>th</sup> Century Newfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is the Presidential Address to the 2018 meeting of the Canadian Society for the History of Medicine at the University of Regina. It examines the organization of the nursing service in Newfoundland during the 1950s and 1960s, as well as the recruitment and retention of nurses in cottage hospitals and nursing stations in outport communities. A number of interconnected strategies were used by the Newfoundland government to staff the nursing service, including recruiting internationally educated nurses, adjusting expectations with respect to registration standards, and using both trained and untrained workers to support nurses' labour. Although this article is intended more as a reconnaissance suggesting the possibilities of such research, it does analyze the interconnected issues of geography, funding and pay, the nursing shortage, and the renegotiation of nursing labour that characterized this period. Furthermore, although this is a case study of Newfoundland and Labrador, it is worth considering how, or whether, the linked strategies used in the province were transferable to other communities across rural, remote, or northern Canada.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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".