MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996921197 · doi:10.7202/1023979ar

Regard sur le processus d’adaptation d’immigrants adultes de la Mauricie sous l’angle des habitudes de vie et des compétences de la vie courante1

2014· article· fr· W1996921197 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Rollande Deslandes, Marie-Claude Rivard, François Trudeau, Jean Lemoyne

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Université de Moncton · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Identity, and Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceSociologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Québec reçoit de plus en plus d’immigrants et la région de la Mauricie n’échappe pas à cette tendance. Des études ont montré la dégradation dans les habitudes de vie des nouveaux arrivants. D’autres se sont attardées à l’identification des compétences de la vie courante susceptibles de favoriser l’adaptation des immigrants dans leur société d’accueil. L’objectif de cette étude exploratoire et qualitative consiste à approfondir le processus d’adaptation d’immigrants nouvellement établis en Mauricie sous l’angle des habitudes de vie (alimentation et activité physique) et des compétences de la vie courante. Des entrevues individuelles semi-dirigées ont été menées auprès de huit parents immigrants. Les résultats indiquent qu’il importe de diversifier l’aide pour faciliter les choix alimentaires et sportifs associés à de saines habitudes de vie. Il faut aussi maintenir les services d’accueil déjà existants, favoriser l’immersion en langue française et offrir de l’accompagnement dans la recherche d’un emploi de manière à favoriser le développement d’un réseau social chez les immigrants adultes.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Université de MonctonSame topicMigration, Identity, and HealthFrench-language works237,207