MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055513323 · doi:10.3917/spub.071.0031

Communication et santé : des paradigmes concurrents

2007· article· fr· W2055513323 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté Publique · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentHealth communicationModernization theorySociologyRaising (metalworking)PsychologyHumanitiesPolitical scienceEpistemologySocial sciencePhilosophyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article recounts the evolution of communications approaches in health-related matters: 1) the approach of modernization, also known as the linear model of behaviour change; 2) the approach of dependency, also known as awareness-raising or empowerment; and 3) the approach of new development, also known as participation and co-development. Why, after the establishment and unfolding of so many programmes utilising communication for health, do social health problems persist? The article underlines a co-existence of various different and sometimes opposing, according to the school of thought, theoretical approaches. It remains that communication as a vector for behaviour change seems to carry on as the dominant theoretical axis in the health field.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.736
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.520
Teacher spread0.401 · 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