The Portrayal of Gender in Health Care: An Examination of Hospital Photographic Archives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Through records creation practices, nation-states, institutions, and corporations impose or attempt to instill particular world views according to their interests, activities, and desires. Health care organizations are no different. This article examines photographic archives available at the recently formed McGill University Health Centre (MUHC) Archives and Special Collections. It explores the image institutional records creators conveyed through the production and dissemination of photographs depicting doctors, nurses, other health care professionals, and volunteers. The article discusses the dynamics of power at play in institutional photographs and uses a gendered frame of reference to confront the power of institutional authorities in their capacity as creators of records and records-creation frameworks. It uses this perspective to evaluate the scope of the archival photographic collection at the MUHC Archives and Special Collections and to conceive subsequent ensuing archival interventions. The article uses critical visual literacy and deconstructionist approaches, highlighting different archival paradigms that will activate the archival collection and help construct an archival environment that will enable counter-narratives. RÉSUMÉ Les entités nationales, institutionnelles et corporatives imposent ou tentent d’imposer, à travers la production de documents, leur vision selon leurs intérêts, activités et désirs. Les institutions médicales ne font pas exception. Cet article effectue l’analyse de photographies d’archives se trouvant au nouveau programme d’archives du Centre universitaire de santé McGill (CUSM). Il examine l’image visuelle que les créateurs de documents ont forgée à travers la production et la diffusion de photographies de médecins, infirmières, membres des autres professions du domaine de la santé et bénévoles. Cet article se penche sur les dynamiques de pouvoir mises en évidence à travers des photographies institutionnelles et propose un cadre analytique du genre afin de confronter le pouvoir institutionnel associé à la production de documents. Cette approche est mise de l’avant afin d’évaluer l’étendue de la collection d’archives au Service des archives et collections spéciales du CUSM et pour concevoir les interventions archivistiques qui suivent. Cet article utilise une approche de littératie visuelle critique et de déconstruction des archives, soulignant différents paradigmes archivistiques qui vont mener vers l’activation de la collection d’archives et la formation d’un environnement archivistique rendant possible l’élaboration de contre-narratifs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".