MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402232665 · doi:10.3390/histories4030018

The Hospital as a Beacon of Science? Parisian Academic Medicine around 1800

2024· article· en· W4402232665 on OpenAlexaff
Frank W. Stahnisch

Bibliographic record

VenueHistories · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMedical education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Owing to medical historian Erwin H. Ackerknecht’s (1906–1988) pioneering study “Medicine at the Paris Hospital, 1794–1848” (1967), the year 1794 is seen as the decisive separation date on which the development and reorganization of the Parisian clinical school—as a broad movement and a system of medical education and clinical practice—distanced it from the traditions of the 18th century. This precise dating is based on the “Rapport et projet de décret sur l’établissement d’une École centrale de Santé à Paris” (1794) by the French clinician and naturalist Antoine-François Fourcroy (1755–1809), which appeared five years after the French Revolution. Fourcroy was asked by the Conseil d’État to submit a detailed report in which he was obliged to comment on the existing health situation and the state of medical care and research. His report thereby ventured so far as to request the continued dissolution of all medical faculties in France, as these institutions were seen as counter-revolutionary hotbeds in the wider educational landscape of the Grande Nation. Fourcroy’s recommendations were implemented a short time later; he had recommended that medical training should be established again in the traditional locations of Paris, Montpellier, and Strasbourg in France yet in the different settings of so-called health schools, Écoles de Santé. In this article, I look at the corresponding training and care structures after the French Revolution, as well as some of the specific reasons which led to the complete suspension of teaching in academic medicine at the time. In the more recent research literature, Ackerknecht’s view has undergone some modifications, whereby the fixation on the date 1794 has been challenged since the French traditions of the royalistic period have hardly been considered. Furthermore, it has been argued that the reorganization of medicine during the time of the Empire remained largely based on knowledge structures derived from the previous 18th century. In order to keep the complex scientific, institutional, and socio-economic conditions of the context of Parisian Academic Medicine aligned, I first explore some developments up to the time of the French Revolution (1789), before assessing the implications of the reform of knowledge structures and curricular programs instigated since the 1790s, as these remain relevant to medical history in the 19th century.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score0.543

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0090.024
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.353 · 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 designQualitative
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoriesSame topicHistorical Psychiatry and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207