MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3169343693 · doi:10.3390/histories1020011

Spirituality and Conflict in Healthcare: The History of the Canadian Baptists and Medical Mission in Orissa, 1900–1970

2021· article· en· W3169343693 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tiasa Basu Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueHistories · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Society, and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationHealth careCasteChristianityPoliticsSociologyPolitical scienceEthnologyReligious studiesLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It was from the middle of the eighteenth century that discussions regarding the strategies taken up by the Protestant missionaries to propagate the Gospel generated the issue of healthcare and medical facilities among people in India. Medical mission, which hitherto was not considered, started to gain importance and reaped positive results in terms of curing individuals and its trustworthiness among tribes residing in the frontier regions. However, this developed a separatist religious identity among the population, which apparently did not appear lethal, but later culminated in the fragmentation and impeachment of solidarity among the adivais (tribal) and vengeance from the Hindu population. This article will show how the Canadian Baptist Mission, with its primary aim of spreading the Kingdom of God among the tribal Savaras in the Ganjam district of Orissa, undertook measures for serving health issues and provided medical facilities to both the caste Oriyas and the tribal Savaras. Although medical activities oriented towards philanthropy and physical well-being, medical mission was not limited to healing illness and caring for all, but also extended to spreading the word of God and influencing the people to embrace Christianity as well, which invited political troubles into the region.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoriesSame topicReligion, Society, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207