Concept traditionnel de la folie et difficultés thérapeutiques psychiatriques chez les Moosé du Kadiogo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The practice of psychiatry in the south of the Sahara in Africa collides with many problems of acceptability of care for the ill and their families. The frequent rejection of the psychiatrist's therapeutic approach can often be explained by the inadaptation of the etiopathogenic approach. Indeed, in black Africa, responsibility of illness differs according to the fact that one has been schooled or not. The western world teaches minorities having the chance to live there or learn about it, that the human body can be assaulted by bacteria, viruses, mycoses or be self-assaulted by changes of its own physiology. Traditional education, for its part, regards the body as a mysterious entity susceptible of being penetrated or eaten by geniuses and anthrophagic sorcerers following a mystico-religious mechanism linked to beliefs and customs. In the majority of the Moose of the Moaga plateau in Burkina Faso, especially regarding madness, these assailants are ancestral geniuses or geniuses from the bush. Psychological suffering caused by a family, social or intrapsychic conflict independent of the invisible world is ultimately delirious for them thus provoking a resistance to give up complete charge of their mentally ill to psychiatric care. For us, an analysis of probable causes of this resistance appeared necessary. Interviews have shown that the psychiatric institution is experienced by the Moose of Kadiogo as a stage in the therapeutic itinerary of their mentally ill, a stage in the course of which their demand for care is reduced to the elimination of inconvenient symptoms. For them, the elimination of the cause derives from a knowledge that psychiatry does not possess, which renders the therapeutic relationship frustrating for both parties.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".