MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910513108 · doi:10.48448/p5mb-tm83

The Risks of Care: What Is at Stake in Letting in the Context of Care and Dementia in Montreal

2022· other· en· W6910513108 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

VenueUnderline Science Inc. · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaContext (archaeology)FriendshipForegroundingDiversity (politics)Long-term care

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dementia care has been described in the literature as mostly burdensome, sometimes rewarding, but usually is framed as not involving parties beyond the individual, her family, and/or paid eldercare workers. The aim of this session is to widen the gaze on dementia care, while foregrounding uncertainty, complexity and variability -- around the “truth” of what dementia is, and around “responsibility” for care. On the one hand, we seek to situate dementia within broader local landscapes of care, including legal frameworks, social welfare and health systems, and more-than-human environments. Borrowing from Ciara Kierans the term “regimes of care,” this panel highlights how dementia care arrangements draw together publicly funded and/or private sector institutions, “kinship and friendship networks, charitable associations, and civil society organizations [in ways] that cannot be specified in advance.” (Panel 1) On the other hand, we seek to attend to the variability and complexity of dementia itself -- this historically uncertain category that historian of medicine Lara Keuck called a “working title,” because of its constantly shifting meaning and the doubt that surrounds dementia over time (and, we would add, across contexts). We approach dementia, in other words, as a site of onto-epistemological diversity • which manifests also in diverse needs for and practices of care. (Panel 2) How are such “regimes of dementia care” lived and performed? How do people work to cobble together care out of contingent, locally specific, often incoherent and fragile assemblages? This panel explores the multiplicity of dementia care regimes addressing a multiplicity of dementias, across a range of distinct settings. Keuck, Lara. 2021. “A Window to Act? Revisiting the Conceptual Foundations of Alzheimer’s Disease in Dementia Prevention,” In: Preventing Dementia? Critical perspectives on a new paradigm of preparing for old age. A. Leibing and S. Schicktanz (eds.). New York/Oxford: Berghahn. Kierans, Ciara. 2019. Chronic Failures: Kidneys, Regimes of Care, and the Mexican State. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUnderline Science Inc.French-language works237,207