MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W563715033

Caring for/caring about : women, home care, and unpaid caregiving

2004· book· en· W563715033 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGaramond Press eBooks · 2004
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHoganCitizenshipCare workGerontologyPsychologyGender studiesSociologyWork (physics)NursingMedicinePolitical scienceLawEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Acknowledgements Introduction 1. Thinking it Through: Women, Work, and Caring in the New Millennium, Pat Armstrong and Hugh Armstrong 2. One Hundred Years of Caregiving, Pat Armstrong and Olga Kits 3. Designing Home and Community Care for the Future: Who Needs to Care? Nancy Guberman 4. What Research Reveals about Gender, Home Care, and Caregiving: Overview and Policy Implications, Marika Morris 5. Redefining Home Care for Women with Disabilities: A Call for Citizenship, Kari Krogh 6. Aboriginal Women and Home Care, Shelly Thomas Prokop, Erika Haug, Michelle Hogan, Jason McCarthy, and Lorraine McDonald 7. 'Just Fed and Watered': Women's Experiences of the Gutting of Home Care in Ontario, Jane Aronson Conclusions About the Contributors Index

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.212 · 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