MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206755702 · doi:10.1017/9781108567152.003

Medicines in Colonial (Public) Health

2019· book-chapter· en· W3206755702 on OpenAlexaff
Laurence Monnais

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismEnthusiasmMedicalizationGovernment (linguistics)CivilizationPublic healthPolitical sciencePublic administrationPolitical economyMedicineSociologyLawPsychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The interplay between, on the one hand, apparent official and professional indifference toward medicines and, on the other hand, signs of popular therapeutic enthusiasm, is one of the central threads running throughout this book. This chapter provides a general overview of the place (not) given to medicines in colonial health policies, budgets, and discourse, and of the challenges facing their supply to and distribution in the public system. Of this information, I ask: how, and to what extent, did colonial and health authorities consider medicines as tools suited to the twin projects of medicalization and civilization? And how did this shape the geographical and economic accessibility of colonial medicines per se – that is, the medicines supplied and distributed by the colonial government? There were different types of public colonial medicines.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.018
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.140 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesFrench-language works237,207