Les praticiens de la santé au Québec, 1871-1921. Quelques données statistiques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
C'est un point de vue généralement accepté que les professions libérales (droit, notariat, médecine), qui étaient le lieu d'orientation privilégié des élites québécoises au XIXe siècle, souffraient alors d'un encombrement. L'article met à l'épreuve cette hypothèse en ce qui concerne les praticiens de la santé. Sur le plan global, on constate que, de 1871 à 1921, le nombre des praticiens québécois, en termes relatifs, a été inférieur à celui de la plupart des autres régions du Canada et des États-Unis. D'autre part, à l'intérieur même du Québec, on note des taux de densité médicale fort différents d'un bout à l'autre du territoire. Ce phénomène est d'ailleurs encore plus marqué si l'on considère chaque discipline séparément (médecins-chirurgiens, pharmaciens, dentistes). Le problème du surnombre apparaît finalement comme la manifestation d'un malaise essentiellement propre aux villes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".