Life-Changing Events in the Practice of a Homeopath: Emily Howard Jennings Stowe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emily Howard Jennings Stowe is acclaimed as Canada’s first white openly female physician to practice medicine. This assessment of Stowe’s accomplishment is accurate because she practiced in the 19th century. However, by today’s definition of a physician, Stowe practiced homeopathy, since she did not engage in standardized allopathic medicine. Yet, no assessment of Stowe’s life-changing events developing her as a homeopath has been attempted until now. A unique narrative process following the tradition of psychoanalytic narratology is engaged based on responses to questions posed regarding her life, from those most objective and specific to those more subjective and general. This follows a prescribed order of question-asking: when, where, who, what, how, and why. The aim is to facilitate comparison and an interpretation of connections regarding her life-changing events as a homeopath. It is found that much of Stowe’s success originated from her family’s upper-class connections, and her Quaker religion’s belief in the intellectual equality of women to men, promoting her studious nature and encouraging her homeopathic education at home and in the United States. There were periods in her life that might have ended her career; however, the protective features of her status permitted her to withstand these difficulties successfully.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".