Bibliographic record
Abstract
Auto/biographical narratives and the authority of lived experience have shaped the field of graphic medicine and the focus of related scholarship. Following a brief introduction to the growing and diversifying field of German-language graphic medicine, this article puts an emphasis on the analysis of two fictional examples of the genre, comparing Elke Renate Steiner’s Risiken und Nebenwirkungen (2010), which deals with the widespread misuse of prescription drugs, and Marijpol’s Eremit (2013), which envisions a world in which children are a rarity and the elderly plan their deaths proactively, booking themselves on final journeys. These two comics could not be more different in their story or plot, tone, or style yet turn out to share common ground in their politics as they tackle similar social justice themes (such as the effect of contemporary working conditions on people’s health, dignity in aging and dying, and the commodification of care work). The aim of the article is to highlight the socio-critical dimensions that fictional graphic medicine, too, possesses and to begin exploring the particular means it has to speak beyond the personal, proffering systemic critique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".