MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540037067 · doi:10.4000/pistes.3829

Après les retraites massives dans deux hôpitaux québécois : enjeux des rapports entre générations différentes de travailleurs

2000· article· fr· W1540037067 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Solange Lefebvre

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santé · 2000
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans les recherches sur la santé et la sécurité au travail, les rapports entre générations de travailleurs demandent à être étudiés davantage. L’un des enjeux est la transmission des savoir-faire pouvant avoir un impact sur la santé des travailleurs et, selon les cas, sur leurs clientèles. Ces questions sont abordées à travers une étude de cas menée en 1998 dans deux hôpitaux de la région de Montréal, après les mises à la retraite de 1997 et l’arrivée de nombreuses recrues. Les impacts négatifs varient selon les unités et les quarts de travail ; on reconnaît la valeur de l’expérience acquise pour les savoirs infirmiers, qui doit être combinée aux savoirs des recrues ; on reconnaît également que les stratégies organisationnelles n’ont guère laissé de place à ces échanges, renvoyés aux initiatives informelles des travailleurs. En termes de santé et de sécurité, on note les facteurs de stress et d’anxiété chez les employés, et les risques encourus par les patients livrés à des employés inexpérimentés et sans surveillance adéquate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.227

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.349 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations6
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santéSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207