MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4390755922 · doi:10.4324/9781003017110-12

Issues of social reproduction and the political economy of health

2024· book-chapter· en· W4390755922 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah Redikopp

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReproductionPoliticsSocial reproductionPolitical economyPolitical scienceSociologySocial scienceEcologyBiologySocial capital

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter explores the ideological and material devaluation of social reproduction in the context of contemporary Canadian healthcare, through elucidating the changing shape of social reproduction in Ontario’s increasingly privatized healthcare system. The chapter examines how the reconfiguration of social reproduction under neoliberal capitalism impacts the day-to-day work of social provisioning in Canadian healthcare, with particular attention accorded to clinical healthcare workers (including nursing staff), ancillary workers, and unpaid informal caregivers. Primarily, the chapter argues that healthcare privatization strategies undertaken in the name of ‘cost-saving’ and ‘efficiency’ rely on the widespread devaluation of social reproductive work, which has profoundly gendered and racialized effects. The chapter, thereby, invites readers to consider the centrality of social reproduction to the logics and practices of health and healthcare under neoliberal capitalism, especially given social reproductive labor is feminized and racialized; and to engage seriously with feminist insights on this labor and the broader political economy of health.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.475
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.061
Scholarly communication0.0090.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal Public Health Policies and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→