MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939982537 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.249-022018

University of Alberta Hospital Acute and Convalescent Polio Care and the Reintegration of Polio Patients into Albertan Communities, 1953–80

2019· article· en· W2939982537 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Geraldine Huynh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliomyelitisMedicineGovernment (linguistics)Agency (philosophy)Health carePolio VaccinationFamily medicineNursingPolitical sciencePediatricsSociologyPoliovirusVirologyVirus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following Canada's largest polio epidemic in 1953, Station 67 at the University of Alberta Hospital (UAH) in Edmonton became home to patients who contracted the virus. As young as nine years old, some of these patients lived at the UAH for more than three decades. Akin to wartime services, the epidemic banded together families, patients, doctors, nurses, community members, and later respiratory, physical, and occupational therapists. The nature of the disease, the government response, and the social and economic climate dramatically affected the lived experiences of patients in Alberta's fight against polio. Drawing on archival research and oral interviews, this article argues that it was the agency and resilience of patients, the contributions of healthcare providers to rapid developments in acute and convalescent care, and the dedication of families that were primarily responsible for the recovery and reintegration of polio patients back into the community.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0190.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207