Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This fourth issue could equally have been allocated the theme of 'health'. Particularly since the Alma-Ata Declaration (1978) - celebrating its thirtieth year and the Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion (1986) both see health 'as a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being'. Optimum health thus means achieving a balance across all of the areas of physical, mental and social well-being. This requires living in a social system where one has access to the services, programs and supports to arrive in this complete state. It is clear that physical and mental health are not treated as level playing fields, not all social systems give equal attention to all of these components, and there are huge cultural variations and socially determining factors that shape national and international differences.Building an ethical health care system - a goal we ought to continue to debate and discuss - means giving equal attention to physical, mental and social well-being. It means providing adequate human and financial resources and access to all three domains. Health, both mental and physical, is the foundation of life. Without discussion and debate about the alternative directions that may need to be taken in mental health care we risk overlooking one of the most central aspects of our being as humans in our social world. This final issue for 2008 specifically tackles the theme of 'mental health'. It explores the diffuse nature of the concept, the potential for it to confuse and it provides a range of perspectives on what elements of the current debate need to be refused.Contributors were asked to present narrative perspectives and share their research, personal experiences or dabble in creativity on the topic of mental health and narrative. Narrative has gained enormous attention in social and health sciences research since the 1980s and this has partly been because it is an approach that facilitates the inclusion of marginalised voices. As research has developed within narrative, the field of counter narratives has also emerged. There is greater inclusion now of personal and alternative perspectives in both research and policy sectors that refuse dominant biomedical and psychiatric explanations of mental illnesses. Many suggest that the search by science for singular biological causes of mental illnesses like depression, schizophrenia and bipolar is no longer relevant to the complex multiple world that we live in. There is no singular cause. Mental illness is not always biologically caused and so we require multiple perspectives to appreciate and understand these complex phenomena.A range of voices comes together in this issue from academia (O'Brien & Fullagar, Canning, Baker et al., Nicki, Lawn, Brown) to those touched directly by living with a family member with a mental illness (Naimet), others who work with people affected by mental illnesses (Brown, Lawn), or those who are direct sufferers and survivors (Morrison). Personal accounts share some of the trials and tribulations of being sick and getting well and sometimes living with someone who is sick and never gets well. Contributors deal with different topics and issues related to the theme of mental health, yet, they all exhibit elements in common. Some refuse poorly defined, diffuse terms like 'recovery,' others examine the confusion between social determinants of mental health and the relationship of this with biological causes of mental illnesses, while there are contributors who question diagnostic labels and their relevance particularly to borderline and multiple personality disorders. All of these articles express caution at accepting the dominant stories told about mental health and our need to engage in this important topic.The two short stories illustrate the fusion of personal and fictional parts of storytelling (Stone, Nanai). A selection of the poetry within the issue is also by people who identify as having a mental illness or by parents, carers or friends of those people (Pankhurst, Buchannan, Stone, Fox). …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,053 | 0,099 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,013 | 0,082 |
| Communication savante | 0,027 | 0,035 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,024 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,041 | 0,061 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».