MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031874241 · doi:10.1037/tra0000855

COVID-19 has united patients and providers against institutional betrayal in health care: A battle to be heard, believed, and protected.

2020· article· en· W3031874241 on OpenAlex
Bridget Klest, Carly P. Smith, Collin May, Jennifer S. McCall‐Hosenfeld, Andreea Tamaian

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Trauma Theory Research Practice and Policy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattleBetrayalCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PandemicHealth careMedicineNursingPolitical scienceMedical emergencyVirologyHistoryLawDiseasePathologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this commentary, researchers, health care consumers, and medical providers reflect on institutional betrayal during the COVID-19 pandemic in American and Canadian health care systems. Examples of institutional betrayal experienced by patients and their family members, as well as medical providers, are described. Although such examples may be more evident to the general public during the current pandemic, they do not represent new problems. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

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.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.308
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.308
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.472
GPT teacher head0.612
Teacher spread0.140 · 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