MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973672832 · doi:10.3138/cbmh.284-092018

Who Controls the Power over Pain? A Comparative History of Nurse Anaesthesia

2019· article· en· W2973672832 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Margaret Vigil-Fowler, Susanne Hillman, Sukumar P. Desai

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Health History · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedical History and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnesthesiaNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From the advent of the use of anaesthesia during surgery through the Second World War, confusion and competition over who should administer the technology - doctors or nurses - dominated gendered discussions of professional boundaries. Using information about practice in the United States, the United Kingdom, and France in this period, we find vastly different outcomes for nurse-administered anaesthesia. Differences in perceptions regarding the gendered nature of this technology and its related level of prestige largely determined who could practice it. When administering anaesthesia carried low prestige and was viewed as non-technical, it fell under the purview of women's work in medicine, that is, nursing. When the same technology gained prestige and became perceived as a technical, medical skill, doctors associated it with their masculine professional identity and worked to exclude nurses from administering anaesthesia.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Health HistorySame topicMedical History and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207