Death, Dying, and Credibility in Long-Term Care: How Healthcare Aides Were the Voiceless Other During the COVID-19 Pandemic
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Confronted by an unprecedented number of deaths in Long-Term Care (LTC) during the COVID-19 pandemic, society had no choice but to engage in a public discourse about the state of death and dying in LTC, and the staff who were caring for residents: healthcare aides. Despite being places where older adults die, death and dying has largely been hidden within LTC homes, serving to complicate and conceal healthcare aides’ experiences at a time when LTC residents were visibly dying. Although being the subject of public discourse, healthcare aides remained voiceless during the pandemic, their experiences of caring for dying residents overlooked by the testimony of experts. Instead of healthcare aides being invited into a conversation to share their unique knowledge of death and dying in LTC, namely through that of touch and practical wisdom, they experienced a lack of epistemic credibility, having been served a testimonial injustice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it