Données sociales et administratives sur la population handicapée : la situation au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides a descriptive analysis of the main social and administrative data on the population with disabilities in Québec. In 1998, 15% of the population had a disability. Disability increases with age and intensifies from age 55 onwards. Moreover, a new measure of disadvantage, i. e. the social consequences of a disability, reveals that 13% of the entire Québec population aged 15 or over living in private households are affected by a more or less severe form of disadvantage. Compared with persons without disabilities, those with disabilities more often have socio-economic characteristics likely to generate disadvantaged situations: they are less educated, less well-off and perceive their health status more negatively. Moreover, disabilities have a negative impact on labour market participation, performance of daily activities and movements. Lastly, the financial statement of disabilities (proportion of expenditures devoted to disabilities in relation to all social expenditures) represented nearly 10 % of social benefits in Québec in 2003-2004; allowances for disabled adults and disability benefits made up nearly three-quarters of the amounts recorded.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.021 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".