MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1485240472 · doi:10.4000/pistes.3663

L’évolution conceptuelle internationale dans le champ du handicap : enjeux socio-politiques et contributions québécoises

2002· article· fr· W1485240472 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Patrick Fougeyrollas

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santé · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsQuebec Rehabilitation Research Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le handicap n’est pas une caractéristique de la personne mais le résultat situationnel de l’interaction entre une personne différente sur le plan corporel ou fonctionnel et un environnement physique et social spécifique. Cette affirmation simple issue du mouvement québécois d’exercice des droits de la personne et d’égalisation des chances des personnes handicapées amorcé depuis une trentaine d’années, et développée dans la Classification québécoise : Processus de production du handicap (PPH) a été au cœur de débats et controverses internationales qui ont marqué la révision de la Classification internationale des déficiences, incapacités et handicaps (CIDIH) de l’Organisation mondiale de la santé.L’auteur retrace les moments forts de cette dynamique québécoise et internationale, ponctuée autant de discussions scientifiques que d’alliances, blocages ou compromis sociopolitiques à partir d’une observation participante privilégiée au sein même des comités et jeux de coulisses internationaux.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.313
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.004
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.351 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations57
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santéSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207