MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416791222 · doi:10.1177/10608265251406262

“Preserving Social Manliness”: A Narrative Inquiry of Hegemonic Masculinity and Self-Management of Multimorbidity Among Pakistani Men

2025· article· en· W4416791222 on OpenAlexaff
Hussan Zeb, Ahtisham Younas, Erika Bassi, Alberto Dal Molin, Ángela Durante

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Men s Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender Roles and Identity Studies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHegemonyHegemonic masculinityNarrativeMasculinityDominance (genetics)Thematic analysisIdentity (music)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Masculinity refers to varied hierarchies of socially constructed descriptions of men’s identity and includes practices that allow the continued dominance of men in society. Previous research focused on examining the intersection of hegemonic masculinity, gender, and single chronic illness. Limited research exists on the intersection of multimorbidity, gender, self-management, and hegemonic masculinity. This study illuminated the interplay of gender, hegemonic masculinity, and self-management of multimorbidity through a narrative inquiry of men’s experiences. Eight interviews were conducted with men between the ages of 36 to 49 who had been living with multimorbidity for 5 to 8 years. Using narrative thematic analysis, four composite case studies were generated to capture how hegemonic masculinity influenced self-management: Concealing Bodily and Affective Struggles, Seeking Help is Dishonorable, Conquering illnesses Symbolizes Strength, and Preserving “Social Manliness”. Men with multimorbidity strived to preserve their hegemonic masculinity by concealing their intrapersonal struggles and avoiding familial and social assistance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.673

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueThe Journal of Men s StudiesSame topicGender Roles and Identity StudiesFrench-language works237,207