MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1910890103 · doi:10.3917/psyt.111.0091

La pertinence de l'éducation somatique auprès des toxicomanes

2005· article· fr· W1910890103 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Débora Bolsanello

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychotropes · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesMolecular biologyPhilosophyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<titre>R&#233;sum&#233;</titre> &#192; l&#8217;heure actuelle, les institutions sp&#233;cialis&#233;es en toxico~manie au Qu&#233;bec sont compos&#233;es d&#8217;une &#233;quipe de m&#233;decins, d&#8217;in~firmiers, de psychologues, de psychiatres, de travailleurs sociaux et de sexologues. Ces institutions n&#8217;explorent pas encore de fa&#231;on officielle et syst&#233;matique le corps et le mouvement comme des voies de transformation et de pr&#233;vention de la toxicomanie. L&#8217;&#233;ducation somatique est un champ interdisciplinaire qui s&#8217;int&#233;resse &#224; la conscience du corps en mouvement dans l&#8217;environnement. Dans cet article, je pr&#233;sente une partie du travail th&#233;orique de mon m&#233;moire de ma&#238;trise qui porte sur la pertinence de l&#8217;&#233;ducation somatique dans le milieu sp&#233;cialis&#233; en toxicomanie. Mes r&#233;flexions d&#233;coulent de mon exp&#233;rience en tant qu&#8217;anthropologue et &#233;ducatrice somati~que travaillant aupr&#232;s des usagers1 du centre de r&#233;adaptation en toxicomanie Le Virage, situ&#233; &#224; Longueuil, au Qu&#233;bec.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychotropesSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207