MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409678902 · doi:10.1080/00309230.2025.2449885

Ageing habits: a case study of the experience of ageing by teaching Sisters

2025· article· en· W4409678902 on OpenAlexaff
Deirdre Raftery, Elizabeth M. Smyth

Bibliographic record

VenuePaedagogica Historica · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgeingSociologyGerontologyPsychologyPedagogyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article explores the experience of ageing in cohort of a group of women that has received scant attention: teaching Sisters (nuns / women religious). The authors argue that the stages of ageing, and in particular the stages which follow menopause and precede final decline and death, were blurred within convent communities. Especially in the time before the Second Vatican Council, as they aged, teaching Sisters experienced very few changes in their daily routine. They were often as active in their sixties and seventies as they had been in their thirties and forties. Often, they often started new careers once they retired from teaching. When they finally withdrew from an active life, or became infirm or ill, the presence of their convent community reduced the possibility of loneliness and lack of mental stimulation. Aging Sisters were also assured of comforts that were often denied to others: they would be nursed; they would be comforted by the prayers of their community; they would be given a dignified burial in the convent cemetery. Through an interrogation of archival evidence, the article offers some insights into the impact of senescence within a specific educational and social context.

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)0.002
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaedagogica HistoricaSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207