MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1836927446 · doi:10.7202/1028220ar

Communication entre intervenants oeuvrant auprès de l’enfant d’âge préscolaire et les familles immigrantes : étude de la portée

2014· article· fr· W1836927446 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Sylvie Tétreault, Chantal Desmarais, Pascale Marier-Deschênes, Daphney St‐Germain, Lilyane Rachédi, Dayna McLaughlin, Élisabeth Rogers, Geneviève Piérart, Alida Gulfi, Marie‐Catherine St‐Pierre

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelle · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à RimouskiUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité LavalMinistère de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité Sociale (Québec)Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La communication entre les intervenants oeuvrant auprès des enfants d’âge préscolaire et les familles immigrantes ayant un enfant avec un trouble de développement pose des défis particuliers. Afin de favoriser le déploiement du plein potentiel de l’enfant, une compréhension mutuelle s’impose. Cette étude de la portée aborde les facilitateurs et les contraintes communicationnelles vécues dans un contexte interculturel et interlinguistique, ainsi que les outils, stratégies ou approches utilisés pour faciliter les échanges. Six bases de données ont été consultées et au terme d’une démarche de sélection interjuges, trente-cinq articles scientifiques ont été retenus. Les principaux obstacles et facilitateurs influençant la communication ont été dégagés. Toutefois, peu de stratégies concrètes, destinées aux intervenants et permettant de soutenir les échanges, ont pu être recensées.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.312 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelleSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207