Psychiatry, risk and vulnerability: The significance of Robert Castel’s work for nursing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robert Castel is an eminent figure in the social sciences because of his innovative contributions to various social and health fields. The seminal work of this poststructuralist author and social activist has influenced several research disciplines, but has not yet had a significant impact on nursing. In this article, we will present the thinking of this man, who considered himself a sociologist, philosopher and "historian of the present." We will examine the most important issues he explored during his career, including the psychiatric apparatus, the management of risk and the social vulnerability. We believe that this thinker's perspective on diverse social issues is very relevant to nursing practice and research and to the health sciences in general. The concepts he developed and utilized with finesse provide us with a critical reading of many contemporary health issues, particularly in mental health and psychiatric nursing. Castel's critical and engaged approach incites mobilization for social justice and greater protections for marginalized and vulnerable persons. These principles of advocacy and social justice are also at the heart of the nursing profession.
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 | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".