MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034413739 · doi:10.1177/1363459320934280

SuperNurse? Troubling the Hero Discourse in COVID Times

2020· article· en· W3034413739 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rochelle Einboden

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health Illness and Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLeadership, Courage, and Heroism Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHEROCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Sociology2019-20 coronavirus outbreakAestheticsMedicineVirologyPhilosophyArtLiteratureInternal medicineDiseaseOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since March 2020, throughout the world people have been paying tribute to health care workers for their commitment in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. In Wuhan they cheer in the night, in Italy they sing from balconies, in Canada they bang pots, and in the United Kingdom they clap for carers. Within the milieu of tangled popular media discourse, heroism has emerged strongly and consistently to describe health care workers, and in particular, nurses.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0250.040
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.009
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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.346 · 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

Citations73
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth An Interdisciplinary Journal for the Social Study of Health Illness and MedicineSame topicLeadership, Courage, and Heroism StudiesFrench-language works237,207