Étude des facteurs d’ajustement au deuil après un suicide et après un décès soudain non intentionnel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La question de savoir si le deuil après suicide est plus difficile qu’une autre forme de deuil est encore débattue dans la littérature contemporaine. Cependant, outre la nature du décès, d’autres variables peuvent expliquer la difficulté du processus d’ajustement au deuil. Parmi ces variables, il y a la satisfaction de couple, la satisfaction de vie et l’attachement. Cette étude a comparé des femmes veuves endeuillées après un suicide (n = 22) et des femmes veuves endeuillées à la suite d’un décès non intentionnel (n = 24). Les résultats indiquent que les femmes endeuillées par le suicide d’un proche, comparativement à celles ayant vécu un autre type de deuil à la suite d’un décès non intentionnel, rapportaient davantage de détresse psychologique et une plus grande insatisfaction face à la vie et au couple. En revanche, la détresse ressentie n’est pas associée à la nature du décès, mais le niveau de satisfaction de vie et de couple serait davantage lié à la difficulté du deuil vécu.
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 | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".