MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201368999 · doi:10.25071/2563-3694.53

Quarantine Diaries

2021· article· en· W3201368999 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Gloria Park

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Sociology Journal of Critical Praxis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyIsolation (microbiology)SadnessFeelingOstracismSocial psychologyJournaling file systemSocial distancePerspective (graphical)Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Anger

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The following six diary entries and journaling pieces were written in the months after the 2019 Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) hit Canada. They express my attempts to pinpoint causes of my personal unhappiness and how overwhelming expectations of productivity affected my mental health and relationships during quarantine. My diary entries are in chronological order, containing reflections on my birthday in quarantine, notes about racial injustice, and reminders of self love. I delve into how isolation and social distancing shifted my perspective, creating unexpected goals, and new hobbies. These reflections reveal thoughts of uncertainty about my career and concerns about my friendships. As the entries continue, themes of self-acceptance and confidence emerge. I encourage readers to empathize with these conflicting feelings of what is “normal” or “expected” during adulthood; challenge destructive behaviour, including excessive self doubt and self-sabotage; and form uplifting habits for a better sense of self. My words have been taken directly from my personal journal and left as they are, no editing, no revising, no polishing. This composition creates an open space that acknowledges how emotions of guilt, anxiety, low self-image, sadness, and hope defined so much of our post-COVID-19 reality.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.641

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1910.057

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Sociology Journal of Critical PraxisSame topicMental Health and Patient InvolvementFrench-language works237,207