MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

[The society "Santé en Français": a successful Canadian model for partnership].

2007· article· fr· W18058694 on OpenAlexaffabout
椎名 伸子

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Technology and Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Francophone Canadians living in a context where French is a minority language have poor access to health services in their native language. To remedy this situation, the Canadian Government has adopted a networking model inspired from the strategy "Towards Unity For Health" (TUFH) elaborated by the World Health Organization (WHO). This model, used since 2001, has given rise to a large number of partnership networks covering the entire regions where minority Francophones live. In this model five key stakeholders in health are being involved: health professionals, communities, managers of health care institutions, educational institutions and governments. The Canadian Federal Government, in close collaboration with communities, directed the project through two non-for-profit agencies: the Sociéte Santé en Français (SSF) and the Consortium National de Formation en Santé (CNFS), sharing a common vision and aiming at improving access to health services and hence health status of minority Francophones. The networking following the TUFH model created a lot of opportunities as well as many challenges to overcome.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.407

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0250.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicMilitary Technology and Strategies→French-language works237,207→