MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399152910 · doi:10.1353/his.2024.a928522

"Has Any Great Harm Been Done?" Canadian Women Breaking Barriers During the First World War

2024· article· en· W4399152910 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Mélanie Morin-Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmStatus quoPolitical scienceHumanitiesCONTESTGovernment (linguistics)First world warLawArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This article follows the journey of Maude Blake Holton, likely the first Canadian woman sergeant, as well as 20 Canadian nurses who trained and worked as anaesthetists overseas during the First World War. These stories bring to light the significant and little-known contributions made by a group of Canadian women who broke gender and professional barriers during the war. Maude Blake Holton's status was deemed irregular and contested by the Canadian military authorities after the war while the employment of nurse-anaesthetists was officially approved in 1918. Although emphasizing gender-based barriers, this article reveals that some of the officers and men overseas valued saving lives and standards of care over conventional gender roles. It also shows how far military leaders and government officials were willing to go to minimize the extent of these women's contributions and to restore the status quo ante bellum. Abstract: Cet article suit le parcours de Maude Blake Holton, qui fut vraisemblablement la première femme sergent au Canada, ainsi que celui de 20 infirmières canadiennes qui ont été formées et qui ont servi comme anesthésistes outre-mer pendant la Première Guerre mondiale. Ces histoires mettent en lumière les contributions considérables et méconnues de Canadiennes qui ont franchi des barrières professionnelles et liées au genre pendant la guerre. Le statut de Maude Blake Holton a été jugé irrégulier et contesté par les autorités militaires canadiennes après la guerre, alors que l'emploi d'infirmières-anesthésistes a officiellement été approuvé en 1918. Tout en mettant l'accent sur les obstacles liés au genre, cet article montre toutefois que certains officiers et militaires en poste à l'étranger accordaient plus d'importance à sauver des vies et à la qualité des soins qu'aux rôles genrés conventionnels. Il révèle également les limites que les dirigeants militaires et les responsables gouvernementaux étaient prêts à franchir pour minimiser la portée de la contribution de ces femmes et rétablir le statu quo ante bellum.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0540.016
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire socialeSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207