MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388112443 · doi:10.1080/09581596.2023.2273201

How pharmaceutical companies misappropriate fat acceptance

2023· article· en· W4388112443 on OpenAlex
Andrea E. Bombak

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Public Health · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicObesity and Health Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStigma (botany)Pharmaceutical industryPublic relationsHealth professionalsIntervention (counseling)Pharmaceutical careHealth careBusinessMarketingPsychologyMedicineNursingPolitical sciencePharmacyPsychiatryPharmacologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pharmaceutical companies influence whether we perceive conditions as relevant to the medical sector and in need of pharmaceutical intervention (pharmaceuticalization). Recently, through coordinated media and professional campaigns, pharmaceutical companies are coming to influence our understanding of bodily size. Beyond merely affecting conversations about how weight should be understood and engaged with in healthcare, however, pharmaceutical companies are swaying how society approaches weight stigma. By elevating certain voices, those of organizations and clinicians with whom they partner, and not others, including fat acceptance activists, pharmaceutical companies are having a regressive impact on body acceptance veiled as “obesity” stigma advocacy.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.008

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 head0.378
GPT teacher head0.562
Teacher spread0.184 · 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