MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294406071 · doi:10.1093/shm/hkac041

The Johnes of Glasgow: Searching, Plague and Early Modern Municipal Power

2022· article· en· W4294406071 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bethany Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial History of Medicine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlague (disease)PoliticsQuarter (Canadian coin)Power (physics)ScholarshipOutbreakPublic healthHistoryMedicinePolitical sciencePublic administrationGeographyDemographyLawAncient historySociologyArchaeologyNursingVirology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Recent scholarship highlights the importance of public health policy in the early modern era. Long before the arrival of the plague, municipal governments instituted a range of policies to protect the health of the commonweal. In the last quarter of the sixteenth century, town councils in both Glasgow and London approved searching during outbreaks. Searchers could view residents for signs of sickness, and tabulate infections and cause of death. Previous studies describe the unique position of female searchers in London, who enjoyed increased economic security without commensurate legal or political power. Glasgow’s burgh records reveal a different model of searching, first recorded in 1574, conducted by men of economic and political influence who were imbued with significant legal power. Searchers were vital to ongoing municipal efforts to slow plague outbreaks in the British Isles, but the nature of their work and the extent of their power was a matter of gender.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.461

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.029
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.189 · 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.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial History of MedicineSame topicHistorical Economic and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207