MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116278418 · doi:10.25071/1918-6215.39784

From Tension to Cross-Constituency Solidarity: Coalition Building in Mad Studies

2025· article· W7116278418 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Disability Discourses · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMental Health and Patient Involvement
Canadian institutionsWomen's and Gender Studies et Recherches Féministes
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDominance (genetics)Control (management)Lived experienceAction (physics)Public policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Procknow (2025; this volume) contributes another important critique by highlighting that people who identify as consumers (i.e., people with lived experience of the psychiatric system who partner with professionals to push for system change and greater control over their lives) have been largely excluded from Mad Studies. While I agree that the exclusion of consumer voices is concerning, Procknow (2025) suggests that survivors and anti-psychiatry proponents act as gatekeepers who intentionally exclude consumers. Although this may occur in some instances, other factors may also play a role, such as historic cross constituency tensions and consumers not seeing a place for themselves in Mad Studies due to the dominance of survivor and anti-psychiatry voices.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.275
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.288 · 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