MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383748078 · doi:10.5195/jmla.2023.1723

More than just pronouns – gender-neutral and inclusive language in patient education materials: suggestions for patient education librarians

2023· article· en· W4383748078 on OpenAlexaff
Eleni Philippopoulos

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Medical Library Association JMLA · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsSinai Health System
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPatient educationMedical educationSociologyPsychologyPublic relationsMedicineLibrary scienceNursingComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trusted patient education materials are the backbone of an effective consumer health library. However, members of the LGBTQ+ community may not see themselves or their families reflected in many resources due to the gendered and non-inclusive language they are written in. This article outlines some suggestions for concrete actions that patient librarians can take to ensure that their materials are not excluding LGBTQ+ patients.

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)0.051
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0510.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.017
Scholarly communication0.0150.038
Open science0.0030.008
Research integrity0.0080.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.006

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Medical Library Association JMLASame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207