MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1580796690 · doi:10.7202/1019187ar

Services spécialisés en santé mentale pour les personnes de 60 ans et plus. Étude pilote de l’évaluation du processus

2013· article· fr· W1580796690 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Kareen Nour, Marijo Hébert, Jean‐Pierre Lavoie, Bernadette Dallaire, Isabelle Wallach, Nona Moscovizt, Alan Regenstreif, Véronique Billette

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté mentale au Québec · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux CavendishSanté Montérégie
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychosocialMental healthEmpowermentPsychologyFeelingAlliancePopulationPsychological interventionValuation (finance)Health servicesGerontologyMedicinePsychiatryPolitical scienceSocial psychologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Quebec, the Centre de santé et services sociaux (CSSS) Cavendish offers specialized services for the elderly with mental health problems (SSSM 60+) (Nour et al., 2011a). This article describes a targeted segment of the population reached (considering the exclusion criteria, only 50% of the elderly receiving services from the SSSM 60+ were followed). The article presents the model of individual changes relating to services, and explores the psychosocial mediators that influence the efficiency of services. This population experiences various psychosocial problems, the most important being mild to moderate symptoms of depression. Services and interventions by the SSSM 60+ team appear to increase significantly the therapeutic alliance and the feeling of empowerment in this clientele. Prioritizing these two concepts during service delivery appears to be an avenue to consider.

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.283
Threshold uncertainty score0.569

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté mentale au Québec→Same topicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→