MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7110531015

Health Care in Women’s Carceral Spaces

2025· article· W7110531015 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - CSUMB (California State University, Monterey Bay) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrisonGovernment (linguistics)Health careMental healthFace (sociological concept)DistressSuicide preventionOccupational safety and health
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has had a long history of mistreating incarcerated women in their jails. The carceral system was built to fit around the needs of men, neglecting to consider the various health issues that only women face. For many years. federally imprisoned women were held in one deteriorated prison, the Prison for Women (P4W), and were held in abhorrent conditions and experienced many acts of violence. Despite the opening of five more prisons and funding for various programs for women, incarcerated women continue to experience violence and health crises, leaving imprisoned women extremely vulnerable to mental and physical distress. In particular, there is little access to contraceptives and sexual health care, due to a lack of staffing, mistreatment by correctional guards and long waitlists. It is especially important to consider incarcerated mothers, the distress women face while giving birth in prison, as well as the distress they face when separated from their children. Utilizing research from community organizations and academic sources, this literature review will examine how the federal government is neglecting the sexual and maternal care of incarcerated women in Canada, and how this leads to greater risk in health for both incarcerated women and the broader community outside of these spaces.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

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 venueDigital Commons - CSUMB (California State University, Monterey Bay)Same topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207