MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Politiques publiques de santé, logiques d' acteurs et ordre négocié au Burkina Faso

2011· article· fr· W1930315087 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers d études africaines · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RÉSUMÉLes échecs relatifs des politiques de santé favorables à l' équité en Afrique sont souvent expliqués par le prisme de la déficience de leur contenu et des modalités de mise en œuvre au détriment d' une compréhension fine du jeu des acteurs dans ce processus. Or, l' analyse de tels échecs ne peut faire l' économie de l' étude des logiques de comportements des acteurs sociaux. Aussi, pour ce faire, une recherche est menée dans un district sanitaire du Burkina Faso à l' aide d' une enquête de terrain de type socio-anthropologique. Cet article documente empiriquement la récurrence de logiques particulières qui permet de mieux comprendre ces échecs relatifs. Les logiques mises au jour sont l' accaparement, la neutra/domination, le discours, le clientélisme, l' opacité, la connivence, l' évitement, la suspicion, la substitution, le mépris du service public. L' étude fait valoir que dans l' analyse de l' interprétation et de la mise en œuvre des réformes sanitaires par les acteurs sociaux le concept de pouvoir doit être pris en compte.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.139
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.300 · 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