MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995752792 · doi:10.1080/01442872.2019.1704234

The social construction of naturopathic medicine in Canadian newspapers

2019· article· en· W2995752792 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Dave Snow

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Studies · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicMeta-analysis and systematic reviews
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsScrutinyNewspaperNaturopathySocial mediaMedicineAdvertisingPolitical scienceAlternative medicineLawBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article uses the social construction of target populations (SCTP) approach to examine the social construction of naturopathic medicine in the Canadian media at a time of policy change. It uses an original dataset of newspaper articles during a period (2013–2017) that involved increased scrutiny about naturopathic medicine due to a high-profile criminal trial. It finds that naturopathic medicine was far more likely to be portrayed negatively than positively, and that the trial increased the frequency of negative stories of the profession. This demonstrates that naturopathic medicine has not been able to withstand a negative social construction in Canada in spite of concrete public policy gains in many provinces. It further demonstrates the need for scholars using the SCTP approach to emphasize the role of the media in influencing target populations’ social constructions.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.077
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.077
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0240.034
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0110.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.657
GPT teacher head0.578
Teacher spread0.079 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy StudiesSame topicMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsFrench-language works237,207