MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205077108 · doi:10.29173/cons29452

The Status of Female Missionaries Mental Health in Late 19th and Early-Mid 20th Century Mission China: Role Searching, Grieving, and Lacking Support, an Everyday Woman’s Life in Mission China

2021· article· en· W3205077108 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Abigail Deck

Bibliographic record

VenueConstellations · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaMental healthNothingGender studiesSociologyPsychologyEconomic growthHistoryPolitical sciencePsychiatryLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article begins the process of looking into female missionaries' mental health and how it was affected during their time in China. Beginning in the nineteenth and twentieth century, a wave of female missionaries, both unmarried and married, made their way to the slowly opening ports of China bringing with them the word of God. The article highlights some of the ways women’s mental health was affected as they lived and preached in China including their juggling of domestic and public roles, homesickness, and losing a child for any myriad of reasons. Regardless of the struggles and experiences these women faced while living in China, the mission societies and Churches these women and their respective communities were attached to did nothing to provide care and assistance for these women leaving them to grieve, suffer silently, and question God’s plan by themselves. Keywords: China; Female Missionaries; mental health; wives; mothers

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConstellationsSame topicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesFrench-language works237,207