Place and Practice in Canadian Nursing History
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The close association between nurses and hospitals often obscures the diversity and complexity of nursing work in other contexts. Place and Practice in Canadian Nursing History looks at nurses and nursing in a wide range of settings from the mid-1800s to the 1970s, including indigenous women on the Canadian prairies; First World War nurses posted overseas; outpost nurses in rural and remote areas of Saskatchewan, Ontario, and Quebec; public health nurses in Winnipeg; and religious congregations in nursing education in New Brunswick. The contributors use feminist and historical perspectives to illustrate how place – understood as both social context and geographic setting – shaped nursing identities and practices. They point out that many nurses found place both liberating and constraining, often simultaneously. Paying attention to place also situates these nurses and their work within larger historical themes of nation-building, war, and political change. Highlighting the complex relationship between place and practice, this volume offers fresh interpretations of nursing history and the history of Canadian health care in general. It will interest historians of gender, race, class, work, and health care, nurse educators and their students, as well as professional nurses and other members of the public interested in nursing history.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".