Enquête qualitative sur la prise de décision en obstétrique : le choix du mode d’accouchement après césarienne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En obstétrique, la médecine offre différentes options pour améliorer les résultats de santé. Ces possibilités représentent autant de prises de décision auxquelles sont confrontés les patients. Afin de procéder au choix des soins, le modèle de partage de la décision médicale constitue actuellement le principal paradigme. Prenant pour exemple le processus de décision concernant le mode d’accouchement après césarienne, nous explorons quelques aspects du processus de prise de décision en obstétrique. De façon générale, la prise de décision concernant le mode d’accouchement après césarienne relève davantage du principe d’autonomie que du partage d’information. Les consultations individuelles ou de groupe, ou encore les outils d’analyse décisionnelle semblent prometteurs pour gérer les différentes problématiques rencontrées.
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 | 0.071 | 0.111 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".