La crise chez les joueurs de jeux de hasard et d’argent : au-delà de l’appel de détresse, les services novateurs qui y répondent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La dynamique des joueurs excessifs a souvent pour conséquence d’affecter les relations affectives, l’emploi, la santé financière de la famille de même que la santé mentale et physique de la personne. Ces multiples répercussions personnelles et professionnelles accentuent la détresse déjà très importante chez les joueurs. Or, la détresse conjuguée à de multiples petits événements stressants crée un terrain propice à l’émergence d’une multitude de crises psychosociales. À partir d’une recension des écrits, cet article présentera d’abord les liens complexes entre la crise et le jeu. Ensuite, une présentation critique des différents services de crise pour les joueurs (lignes d’écoute, services d’intervention de crise dans les casinos et service d’autoexclusion) sera effectuée. Enfin, nous conclurons par des recommandations pour améliorer les services actuels.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".