Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sous l’impulsion des valeurs d’autonomie, d’empowerment ou de consentement éclairé créditant le patient d’un nouveau statut, la relation qui s’instaure entre médecins et malades se présente aujourd’hui comme résolument transformée, dans la logique nouvelle de la « démocratie sanitaire ». D’autres logiques sociales et culturelles continuent cependant de sous-tendre les pratiques des médecins et des malades. Leurs traces ne sauraient être analysées seulement comme des survivances du passé, car de nouvelles normes bousculent, sans les supplanter, les normes anciennes. On montrera ici, à partir d’une étude menée dans des hôpitaux français sur l’information entre soignants et soignés dans le contexte de maladies graves, que la rencontre de ces normes produit un nouveau type de relation médecin-malade, dans laquelle chacun tente de définir sa place à l’intersection de logiques hétérogènes, tout en se référant à des principes contradictoires.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.157 | 0.048 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".