Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le présent article examine la reconstruction du monde vécu de quatre personnes ayant survécu à un traumatisme craniocérébral du point de vue de la théorie des rites de transition développée par Victor Turner (1969, 1982, 1986). Les transcriptions des récits de vie et des entrevues semi-structurées réalisées avec ces quatre personnes ont été analysées d’un point de vue thématique, syntaxique et conceptuel. Ces analyses démontrent que ces personnes ont eu recours après leur accident à trois stratégies principales afin de reconstruire leur monde vécu et leur propre personne : le réalignement, la transcendance et l’intégration dans des marges. Les auteurs présentent l’interaction entre ces stratégies, les bénéfices de la pluralité tactique, l’utilisation variée de ces stratégies au fil des contextes et du temps. Finalement, diverses implications de cette recherche, en ce qui a trait aux conceptions de la réinsertion sociale et à l’organisation des services de réhabilitation, sont soulignées.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".