Aspects sociopolitiques de la prévention du VIH auprès des personnes consommant des drogues par injection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le rapport toxicomanie-sida soulève des questions sociétales complexes et profondes venant éprouver notre degré de maturité sociale et de respect de l'autre. L'expertise biomédicale et épidémiologique sert actuellement de référence pour baliser des orientations et stratégies de prévention du VIH auprès des personnes consommant des drogues. Cette façon de voir et de faire a pour effet de subordonner presque exclusivement le champ des interventions préventives au plan individuel et dans les dimensions sanitaires. L'auteur relate des paradoxes, obstacles et égarements dans l'application des programmes de prévention du VIH et propose un renouvellement des pratiques sociales en traitant d'enjeux plus globaux de société visant à la réduction des inégalités sociales et économiques et en renvoyant à la reconnaissance de l'émergence de la personne en tant que sujet de sa vie et au respect de la dignité de la personne humaine.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".