La lutte à la maltraitance au Québec Quelques mises en parallèle avec la démarche « Villes Amies des Aînés » <br>A luta contra os maus-tratos no Québec. Alguns paralelos na implementação de “Cidades Amigas dos Idosos”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bien que la lutte à la maltraitance compte 30 ans d’histoire et d’actions au Québec (Canada), ce n’est qu’en 2010 que fut adopté le premier Plan d’action gouvernemental pour contre la maltraitance envers les personnes aînées 2010-2015. Le présent article fait le point sur les politiques publiques et lês actions de lutte à la maltraitance envers lês personnes aînées au Québec puis expose, em parallèle, lês liens entre ces politiques publiques et actions de lutte à la maltraitance et la démarche d’implantation et d’évaluation du programme Villes Amies des Aînés de l’Organisation Mondiale de la Santé (OMS, 2007), qui a été introduit comme programme gouvernemental au Québec depuis 2009. Il offre ainsi une analyse détaillée Du contenu de 4 documents publics récents. Dans um deuxième temps, Le projet Arrimage, une recherche-action intersectorielle de lutte à la maltraitance em cours à Montréal, est décrit démontrant l'importance des actions concertées. Mots-clés: Maltraitance; Ville-Amie des Aînés; Québec (Canada); Politiques Publiques; Démarches Intersectorielles. RESUMO Embora a luta contra os maus-tratos conte com 30 anos de história e de ações no Québec (Canadá), somente em 2010 foi adotado o primeiro Plano de ação governamental para combater os maus-tratos a idosos 2010-2015. O presente artigo faz um levantamento das políticas públicas e das ações de luta contra os maus-tratos às pessoas idosas no Québec e expõe, paralelamente, os laços entre essas políticas públicas e ações de luta contra os maus-tratos e a iniciativa de implantação e de avaliação do programa Cidades Amigas dos Idosos da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS, 2007), que foi introduzido como programa governamental no Québec desde 2009. Oferece, assim, uma análise detalhada do conteúdo de 4 documentos públicos recentes. Num segundo momento, o projeto Arrimage, uma pesquisa - ação intersetorial de luta contra os maus tratos em curso em Montreal, é descrito, demonstrando a importância de ações concertadas.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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".