‘It’s not the science we distrust; it’s the scientists’: Reframing the anti-vaccination movement within Black communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anti-vaxx movement is often associated with conspiracy theories and dismissed as being 'anti-science'. However, scepticism from Black communities must not be read as being 'anti-science', but rather 'anti-scientist' due to endemic racism in medical communities and structural inequalities in healthcare. Since slavery and its aftermath - such as through the case of Henrietta Lacks, and now through the Covid-19 pandemic - the devaluation of Black life has been highlighted through the failure to acknowledge and address health disparities amongst racialised and Black peoples [primarily in the United States]. Although the development of a vaccine is an important step in fighting Covid-19, its development and distribution need to be done so safely and in conjunction with addressing the needs and concerns of Black communities, who have been disproportionately affected by the pandemic.
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 | 0.020 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.029 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".