MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132993400

Where Sickness Comes From: Reading and Unsettling Medicine in the Canadian Arctic

2017· dissertation· W7132993400 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Allison Crawford

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2017
Typedissertation
Language
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)Context (archaeology)FrontierReading (process)Health careArcticNarrativeAffect (linguistics)Gaze
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My research project examines the written accounts of eight physicians who document their practice of medicine in the Canadian Arctic: Lorris Elijah Borden (1903–1904), Leslie David Livingstone (1922–1925), Jon A. Bildfell (1940–1942), Joseph P. Moody (1946–1949), Charlie O’Connell (1955), Otto Schaefer (1953–1985), John H. Burgess (1973–2003), and Kevin Patterson (1999, 2006). Through their life-writing practices, they enact both competency and anxiety, which are ultimately the tensions of the settler-colonial context. Discursive, affective, and visual-spatial readings of these accounts reveal how the framing of disease in the settler-colonial context engendered physician identity and rationalized the forms of healthcare established for Inuit. A discourse analysis of these accounts reveals how the clinical formulations and diagnoses advanced by these physicians transformed the Inuit patient into an uncivilized and uneducated figure, part of a dying culture ill-equipped to participate in managing their own healthcare needs. The Arctic doctor, in contrast, was knowledgeable, competent, and heroic. Affect theory shows how the reading and representation of Inuit affect, and the corollary affect of doctors, supported these discourses. The binaries used to characterize Inuit—grateful or hostile, medically compliant or non-compliant—codify the exchange between doctor and patient. Disruptive physician affects—shame, loneliness, grief—discompose the medical-settler-colonial encounter and betray their uncertainty and vulnerability. The Arctic landscape and frontier space in which the clinic is located is critical to this formation of physician identity. The photographs of landscapes and patients in the clinic bring the masterful gaze that surveys the land and the medical gaze that assesses patients into the accounts. Yet the land—vast and barren, gendered as an unwelcoming and monstrous woman—tests the physicians’ masculinity and medical assurance. Until medicine acknowledges its role in establishing and maintaining settler-colonialism, reconciliation will not be possible. More broadly, physicians can benefit from critical tools for analysis and reflection, including postcolonial and Indigenous critical perspectives. Narratives by Inuit, presented here alongside this physician life-writing, demonstrate what has been largely overlooked by these physicians and not grasped by Western biomedicine. Inuit qaujimajatuqangit is contained in narrative forms by Inuit writers and artists, and offers cultural tools for wellness and resilience.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0480.030
Scholarly communication0.0110.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.371 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicIndigenous Studies and Ecology→French-language works237,207→