MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2008296481 · doi:10.7202/1013093ar

Euthanasie et intégrité

2012· article· fr· W2008296481 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marie-Luce Delfosse

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontières · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En 2002, la Belgique a adopté trois lois relatives respectivement à l’euthanasie, aux soins palliatifs et aux droits du patient. Ces lois étendent le champ de l’autonomie décisionnelle du patient. Cependant, s’agissant de l’euthanasie, ne convient-il pas de discerner, au-delà de l’autonomie, un enjeu éthique plus fondamental : l’intégrité morale non seulement du patient mais aussi du médecin ? Tel est le fil conducteur de la réflexion menée ici. Celle-ci s’appuie principalement sur les analyses de l’identité et de l’éthique de Paul Ricoeur dans Soi-même comme un autre , et sur l’approche de la relation médecin-patient d’Henri Ey dans Naissance de la médecine . Ces références conjuguées permettent de proposer des repères éthiques en lien avec l’intégrité morale aux médecins confrontés à une demande d’euthanasie.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.006

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.339 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontièresSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207