Dissemination bias can occur when qualitative research is published selectively, potentially reducing the confidence in qualitative evidence. This retrospective cohort study aims to quantify the extent of non-dissemination of qualitative health research by following 1,123 conference abstracts. The proportion of non-dissemination, the time to publication, as well as associations between author or study characteristics and full publication were examined. For 22.8% of these studies, no full publication could be identified within at least 6 and up to 8 years after their presentation. For those that were published, median time to publication was 11 months (95% CI 10 to 12). Studies from authors affiliated with institutions in Australia were more likely to be published than those from North America (OR 4.47; 95% CI 1.58 to 18.74). Oral presentations were more likely to be published than poster presentations (OR 3.40; 95% CI 1.57 to 8.20). Studies that used two qualitative data collection methods were more likely to be published than studies that used one qualitative method only (OR 1.53; 95% CI 1.01 to 2.38). Conference abstracts that reported no funding were less likely to be published than those which reported funding (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.51 to 0.99). Publicly funded research was more likely to be published than privately funded research (OR 2.24; 95% CI 1.16 to 4.28). Given the considerable proportion of unpublished health-related qualitative studies, there is a reason to believe that dissemination bias may impact negatively on qualitative evidence synthesis. This can, in turn, impair decision-making that uses qualitative evidence.

A monoid presentation is called special if the right-hand side of each defining relation is equal to 1. We prove results which relate the two-sided homological finiteness properties of a monoid defined by a special presentation with those of its group of units. Specifically we show that the monoid enjoys the homological finiteness property bi- if its group of units is of type . We also obtain results which relate the Hochschild cohomological dimension of the monoid to the cohomological dimension of its group of units. In particular we show that the Hochschild cohomological dimension of the monoid is bounded above by the maximum of $2$ and the cohomological dimension of its group of units. We apply these results to prove a Lyndon’s Identity type theorem for the two-sided homology of one-relator monoids of the form $\langle A \mid r=1 \rangle $. In particular, we show that all such monoids are of type bi-. Moreover, we show that if r is not a proper power then the one-relator monoid has Hochschild cohomological dimension at most $2$, while if r is a proper power then it has infinite Hochschild cohomological dimension. For any nonspecial one-relator monoid M with defining relation $u=v$ we show that if there is no nonempty word w such that $u,v \in A^*w \cap w A^*$ then M is of type bi-$\mathrm {FP}_\infty $ and has Hochschild cohomological dimension at most $2$.

This introduction situates the Allied occupation of Italy as a distinctive yet comparatively underexplored case within the broader history of mid-twentieth-century military occupations. It traces the origins, peculiarities, and contradictions of Allied rule, foregrounding the tension between liberation and occupation that shaped both contemporary experiences and subsequent historiography. After outlining the fragmented development of the field and the long predominance of liberation-centred narratives, it calls for recontextualising the occupation of Italy within wider transnational and comparative frameworks. Rather than examining the Italian case solely through an exploration of its domestic impact, the article proposes treating it as an early laboratory for Allied ruling practices that were later applied elsewhere. In addition, it suggests exploring the Italian case through a set of research themes that have emerged from the new comparative field of Occupation Studies. The special issue advances this agenda by combining attention to hitherto marginalised aspects of the era with critical reflection on established subjects, thereby contributing to a reassessment of Italy’s place within the history of Allied rule in mid-twentieth-century Europe.

This article explores the interplay between business elites and the Argentine state in shaping social policy from the late nineteenth century until 1943, focusing on the sugar industry in Jujuy. It asks why sugar industrialists introduced welfare measures in their mills during the 1930s and what social conditions shaped their choices. We argue that limited assistance initiatives, introduced following the Great Depression, allowed mill owners to justify tariff protection while reinforcing their dominance over workers and curbing union influence. These measures, rooted in the sugar elites’ control of provincial politics and sustained intervention in the state apparatus, exemplify early forms of private–public cooperation in welfare provision. By tracing the evolution of state–business interaction in social provision, the article demonstrates how local industries shaped welfare regimes before the rise of Peronism, offering new insights into the diversity of policy responses and social realities in Argentina and Latin America.

Interest in large language models (LLMs) as a tool for meta-analyses and systematic reviews (MA/SRs). We prospectively developed 515 unique prompts by predefined screening-related categories and tested with open-access LLMs (Llama, Mistral) against four gold-standard MA/SRs from different medical fields published after the LLMs’ training cut-offs, using a Python-based pipeline. Heterogeneity between prompts was quantified, and hypothetical workload/cost reduction with top-performing prompts calculated. Across 12,360 pipeline runs, LLMs versus MA/SRs reached average recall/sensitivity = 83.6 ± 17.0%, precision = 18.5 ± 15.6%, specificity = 36.6 ± 23.7% F1-score = 27.6 ± 17.2%, and accuracy = 61.1 ± 11.0%. F1-scores were significantly higher when prompts focused on methods (0.78 ± 0.40%), explicitly mentioned MA/SR screening (0.81 ± 0.37%), included the comparison MA/SR’s title (5.64 ± 0.37%) or selection criteria (8.05 ± 0.68%), and with more LLM parameters (70b = 4.48 ± 0.31%, 123b = 7.77 ± 0.31%), but lower when screening abstracts instead of titles (−3.67 ± 0.28%). In LLM-base preselection, top-performing F1-score prompts (recall/sensitivity = 72.2%, specificity = 66.1%, precision = 28.6%) would reduce screening demands by 34.5%−37.5%, saving 8.4–8.8 weeks of work and 17,592–18,552. Recall/sensitivity increased with less MA/SR information contrasting F1-score results, which highlights a recall/sensitivity-precision/specificity trade-off. F1-score increased with detailed MA/SR information, while recall/sensitivity increased with shorter, zeroshot prompts. We provide the first prospectively assessed prompt engineering framework for early-stage LLM-based paper screening across medical fields. The publicly available Python pipeline and full prompt list used here support further development of LLM-based evidence synthesis.

Populism has become generally equated with far-right politics in public discourse. Beyond this association being widely problematised in much of the literature on populism, in this theoretical intervention, we argue that the populist label is ill-fitting for far-right politics for three reasons. First, any antagonism of ‘the people’ against ‘the elite’ is only secondary, at best, for the far right. Second, while populism constructs an anti-elitist crisis of the system, the far right constructs a crisis in the system, seeking to (re-)entrench elite rule and systems of oppression. Third, populism transgresses hegemonic political norms by making a novel political subject visible, whereas the far right attempts to extend the privilege of its already privileged voting base. As such, we argue that we should abandon the ‘populist’ signifier to refer to reactionary politics and instead rely on more precise, but also more stigmatising signifiers such as far/radical/extreme right for projects of reactionary people-building. Whereas populism builds a coalition through equivalential links between the demands of ‘the people’, such demands are of little concern for reactionary elites. Instead, ‘the people’ are constructed to lend legitimacy to their elitist project. While there are clear risks in attempting to reclaim the concept considering its quasi-hegemonic misuse, we argue that the emancipatory potential of populism makes it worthy of serious investigation in our demophobic and authoritarian times.

In this tribute, I pay homage to the late Deborah Cameron (1958-2026), a leading feminist linguist whose scholarship shaped sociolinguistics’ understanding of the relationship among language, society, gender, sexuality, and power. The paper traces Cameron’s sustained intervention against biological determinism, romanticised accounts of gender difference, and the assumption that linguistic reform alone can produce social change. Throughout, the tribute highlights Cameron’s distinctive analytic stance: her insistence on complexity, her resistance to consensus, and her commitment to critique as an indispensable scholarly practice. I argue that Cameron’s legacy lies not only in specific theoretical contributions but also in her enduring challenge to treat language as a social phenomenon without mistaking it as a sufficient agent of social transformation. (Sociolinguistics, language and gender, feminism, power, ideology)

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the pedagogical application of Generative AI (GenAI) to a particularly fruitful area of Homer, the speeches, drawing on narratology as a theoretical framework to contextualise the use of the technology. The teaching methodology, students interrogating a chatbot to explore a speech from Homer, comprises dialogic learning as students craft questions, reflect and respond to the chatbot’s responses. This reiterative process is demonstrated through dialogue with Microsoft Copilot on one speech from the Iliad, book 16, where Achilles chides a tearful Patroclus (Il. 16.7–19), and one from the Odyssey, book 19, where Odysseus rebukes the treacherous maid Melantho (Od. 19.71–88). Two different strategies were deployed to highlight the response patterns of GenAI. With the Iliad, the strategy was to ask Copilot questions directly about the speech; with the Odyssey, Copilot was asked to assume the role of a character from the exchange. It was found that Copilot supported a narratological interpretation of the text by offering students an informed, and largely accurate, window on the speech for them to explore key considerations such as focalisation, the viewpoint on the unfolding narrative. Furthermore, while Copilot provided a rich layered response, there was still space for students to negotiate the meaning of the text further, retaining their own responsibility as active learners. The conclusion is that GenAI is in line with an inquiry-based approach to the study of Homer that promises to engage students and keep the discipline fresh.

This article draws on queer and feminist social anthropological epistemologies in order to sketch out a methodological framework for the interpretation of archaeological data from funerary contexts. Funerary assemblages have ongoing significance in archaeological models of identity and social structure, including one’s status, gender, cosmological beliefs, etc. Biomolecular analyses of human remains are a major source of data about the past and are increasingly used to reconstruct past social structures, especially where there is evidence of biological connection between individuals at a single funerary site. However, archaeological interpretation of these sites is complicated by their origin in social interactions, belief structures, and sometimes extended funerary rites, which themselves may have been adapted for a range of ritual, political and interpersonal needs. Here, we consider the funerary sphere as a site of ‘kin-work’, a concept from feminist anthropology that centres the everyday, habitual, and often overlooked material efforts of sustaining inter- and intra-generational familial relations. We argue that kinning practices form a key part of burial rites as the dead person or persons’ relationships are reconsidered, renegotiated, transformed, or manipulated. The goal is to develop a model of kin relations within funerary contexts in order to contribute to a more nuanced archaeology of social practice that complements emerging discussions of family structure, kinship and relatedness.

Lookism, wrongful appearance discrimination, is prevalent and impactful, and yet largely neglected. This paper explores why this form of discrimination is ignored, when other forms of discrimination which have similar impacts in, for example, employment and education, are taken seriously in policy, practice, and everyday life. It offers five possible reasons for why lookism is neglected; that it is unfamiliar, that people believe lookism should not be prevalent, that people believe lookism is natural, that lookism is not legislated against and that shame attaches to experiences of lookism. The paper seeks to offer an account of the reasons that underpin the otherwise confusing neglect of lookism. The paper argues that far from being an acceptable form of discrimination, lookism is a serious form of discrimination that all, irrespective of political and ideological commitments, have reasons to address.

Kinship studies recently have been going through a new wave of attraction in archaeogenetics and archaeology. Interdisciplinary cooperation remains an important challenge in these endeavours. Any research that requires interdisciplinary efforts will lead to reductive and potentially misleading conclusions if that cooperation is restricted to a range that is too narrow. The consequences usually are inadequate research results and insufficient ranges of interpretation. Moreover, such methodologically limited inquiries also may entail ethical concerns. Some of this is also valid for kinship analyses, in the study of the deep past as well as for contemporary communities. The present article examines the recently presented case of (‘Pannonian’) Avar excavations to demonstrate how archaeogenetic and archaeological interpretations may tend to ignore socio-cultural complexities. By arguing for the inclusion of socio-cultural anthropology in professional interdisciplinary kinship analyses of the deep past, concepts such as polygyny, levirate, ghost marriage and the notion of ‘female exogamy’ are examined for the case under scrutiny. The article illustrates how certain kinship practices—often misinterpreted in solely genetic terms or entirely ignored—can be understood as ethnographically grounded while also having a cross-cultural meaning suitable for comparison that is indispensable for the study of kinship in any historical period.

This article examines the discursive production and transformation of value through the oft-overlooked practice of hotel laundry work. In tracing the object biographies of luxury linen items, my goal is to surface work/ers ordinarily obscured and/or disregarded. The analysis is grounded in discourse-ethnographic fieldwork conducted in two five-star hotels and one commercial laundry in Hong Kong. Specifically, I consider how laundry is handled, evaluated, and talked about across three timespaces: (i) documentary regimes and frozen actions in hotel rooms; (ii) silent work and human-machine interactions in laundry plants; and (iii) the dis/assembling and re/valuing of ‘condemned’ linen. In each timespace, discourses of cleanliness/dirt and concomitant registers of value emerge. Following Graber (2023), I also pay special attention to sensory or ‘qualic’ evaluations. These ‘laundry routes’, I argue, expose how language and material practice intersect to structure broader value regimes and specifically, ideologies of cleanliness within economies of leisure/luxury consumption. (Language materiality, value discourse, luxury labour, object biographies, discard studies)

It is undeniable that nongovernmental organization (NGO) beneficiaries should have their interests protected, especially when investing in and borrowing from a microfinance provider. Yet, prior literature highlights the patchy nature of beneficiary accountability when NGOs prioritize funders’ and donors’ accountability and commercialization. In this longitudinal case study on a large development microfinance NGO, multi-actor collaboration between donors, funders, and regulators to impose accountability requirements helps protect the interests of NGO beneficiaries. New institutional rules and accountability norms were developed to create dialogs between NGOs and their beneficiaries. Coercive mechanisms were established to sanction situations where beneficiary interests were not upheld in a type of surrogate accountability. Our longitudinal study integrates institutional theory and the stakeholder collaboration concept to show how donors and funders can work with government regulators to increase their effectiveness and protect beneficiaries. However, cultural issues limit full surrogate accountability.

We introduce a new framework for understanding how cognitive systems (e.g., humans) learn from experience, based on the concept of representational capacity—the relative amount of representational resources devoted to encoding past experiences. Most paradigms in cognitive science have operated under the assumption that these resources are constrained, forcing cognitive systems to compress rich and noisy experiences to effectively generalize to new situations. We leverage recent advances in computer science to outline the implications of learning with excess capacity, or applying even more representational resources than needed to perfectly memorize all the details of one’s past experiences. In particular, we review evidence suggesting that excess capacity systems can exhibit many of the characteristics of human learning, such as the simultaneous ability to memorize individual experiences and generalize knowledge to new situations. We define and differentiate between constrained (not enough), sufficient (just enough), and excess (more than enough to perfectly capture all the details of one’s past experiences) capacity. We derive empirical properties of learning in each of these capacity regimes, and compare these predictions to effects documented for human learning. We highlight the broad implications of this framework for advancing theoretical and empirical work across cognitive, clinical, and developmental psychology.