MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043249759 · doi:10.7202/024972ar

La bioéthique, trente ans plus tard : qu’en est-il des espoirs des fondateurs face à la recherche?

2007· article· fr· W2043249759 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThéologiques · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEthics in medical practice
Canadian institutionsSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilSaint Paul UniversityUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les questions à portée éthique qui se manifestent en recherche traversent la bioéthique de ses origines à ses développements les plus récents. Formulées initialement surtout de l'intérieur des frontières américaines, berceau de ce mouvement social, elles trouvent aujourd'hui écho dans plusieurs pays du monde, même en dehors du contexte occidental. Leur présence se fait particulièrement vive là où l'expérimentation porte sur des êtres humains. Depuis les années 1960, la bioéthique a évolué et s'est « spécialisée » en différents secteurs. Qu'est-il advenu de son volet « éthique de la recherche » entre les jours de ses premiers balbutiements et ceux qui ont vu la publication de l'Enoncé de politique des trois conseils? Dans quelle mesure les espoirs qui habitaient ses fondateurs se sont-ils réalisés? Ces deux questions feront l'objet de la présente réflexion.

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.

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)0.110
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.163
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1100.163
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0080.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.371
GPT teacher head0.543
Teacher spread0.173 · 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