MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Le mouvement de santé en français en contexte linguistique minoritaire: les représentations des acteurs sur l'avenir des services

2011· article· fr· W1534255340 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Bouchard

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterpreting and Communication in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrenchHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le plan d'action pour les langues officielles lancé en 2003 projette de revitaliser la dualité linguistique du pays. Parmi les domaines prioritaires, la santé se voit privilégier dans le but d'assurer la formation des professionnels de la santé pour desservir les communautés de langue officielle minoritaire et de réseauter les principaux acteurs préoccupés par l'organisation des services dans la langue minoritaire. L'objectif de cet article est de rendre compte des représentations des francophones en situation linguistique minoritaire eu égard à l'avenir des services de santé en français. L'étude repose sur une méthodologie participative: la cartographie conceptuelle permettant de recenser l'univers conceptuel d'une problématique donnée. The Action Plan for Official Languages launched in 2003 intends to revitalize the country's linguistic duality. Among the priority areas, health is the focus in order to ensure the training of health professionals to serve official language minority communities and to network the main actors concerned about the organization of services in the minority language. The aim of this paper is to report representations of Francophones in minority with respect to the future of health services in French. The study is based on a participatory methodology: concept mapping to identify the conceptual universe of a given problem.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicInterpreting and Communication in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207