The path dependency theory: analytical framework to study institutional integration. The case of France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The literature on integration indicates the need for an enhanced theorization of institutional integration. This article proposes path dependence as an analytical framework to study the systems in which integration takes place. PURPOSE: PRISMA proposes a model for integrating health and social care services for older adults. This model was initially tested in Quebec. The PRISMA France study gave us an opportunity to analyze institutional integration in France. METHODS: A qualitative approach was used. Analyses were based on semi-structured interviews with actors of all levels of decision-making, observations of advisory board meetings, and administrative documents. RESULTS: Our analyses revealed the complexity and fragmentation of institutional integration. The path dependency theory, which analyzes the change capacity of institutions by taking into account their historic structures, allows analysis of this situation. The path dependency to the Bismarckian system and the incomplete reforms of gerontological policies generate the coexistence and juxtaposition of institutional systems. In such a context, no institution has sufficient ability to determine gerontology policy and build institutional integration by itself. CONCLUSION: Using path dependence as an analytical framework helps to understand the reasons why institutional integration is critical to organizational and clinical integration, and the complex construction of institutional integration in France.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".