Physical Impairment or Disability? Three Cases of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip from Grote Kerk, Alkmaar, the Netherlands (A.D. 1716–1830)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Disability is part of the human experience, yet until recently, the lived experiences of individuals affected by physical impairment have been overlooked in bioarchaeological studies. Disability is a social construct; how we define disability is culturally specific, which makes identifying disability in archaeological contexts difficult. However, by defining disability as the inability to function within expected lifeways, it is possible to examine the effects of physical impairment on lived experiences and explore the construction of disability in historic contexts. Using a biocultural lens and robust cultural contextualization, this study examines the ability to function of three middle- to upper-class adult females from Grote Kerk, Alkmaar, the Netherlands (A.D. 1716–1830), with diagnoses of permanent, bilateral developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). DDH results from an abnormality in the hip joint’s size, shape, or orientation and, when untreated, leads to loss of normal joint function and deteriorating quality of life. While DDH probably resulted in limited mobility and pain for all three individuals analyzed in the present study, there is little evidence to support disablement in the form of social restrictions. The findings add to the ongoing discussion of historic disability by examining the intersection of socioeconomic status, sex, and physical impairment in a post-medieval Dutch population and add data that can be used in estimating historic prevalence rates of DDH, which are variable across modern populations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".