Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book examines the welfare of disabled people during the welfare state of the 1940s to the later 1970s. The welfare state seemed to promise universal health and welfare for all, but originally excluded millions of disabled people. With the rediscovery of poverty in the dynamism of the 1960s, it was commonly held that new and sweeping provisions would result in the full inclusion of disabled people in the welfare state and society. This appeared to have been achieved with the creation of extensive cash benefits in 1975, but these were ineffective and appeared just before the rolling back of the state and a renewed focus on the free market and a competitive society under the Thatcher governments. The book is the first to contextualise historically disability in the welfare state and under each government of the period. It adds disability policy to state of knowledge on the Labour and Conservative parties, the media and advocacy,the Trades Unions Congress, and the personal social services. It provides the first major analysis of the Disablement Income Group, one of the most powerful pressure groups in the 1960s, as well as an original analysis of the 1972 Thalidomide crisis using public documents previously unavailable under the thirty-year closure rule for public documents.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.858 | 0.829 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".