Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some 60-plus Canadian women who served as nursing sisters in the Canadian Army Medical Corps (CAMC) in the Great War died during their service and constituted the first female casualties of the new Canadian nation. Initially praised for their courage, but soon forgotten, professional nurses fit uneasily within the post-war dichotomy of male soldiers and mother-mourners. Seeing themselves as soldiers, nurses sought to highlight their service and their role in opening the way for a greater role for women in the Canadian military. In this article, the author examines commemorative initiatives for these nurse casualties at the local level, where personal and community sentiments were more likely to be expressed than at the national level. Official bodies, principally the Imperial (later Commonwealth) War Graves Commission (WGC) and the Canadian military, bestowed military funerals and WGC tombstones on nurses – something that surprised many community and family observers. Still, in according nurses identical treatment to their male counterparts, officials ignored their role as the first female military officers. Nurses themselves and their families, colleagues, and communities showed no such reticence. Families added personal inscriptions onto uniform WGC tombstones, which provided a window of understanding on early nurse/military officers’ view of their service, and erected their own tombstones and plaques. Communities afforded nurses a prominent role in local initiatives, often placing nurses’ names at the head of town cenotaphs. They also told their stories at local museums, kept their records, and even featured them in performance art. Towns, colleagues, local historians, families, and artists, enriched by the record keeping and devotion of nurses’ descendants, have ensured the nurses’ stories have been kept alive.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".