L'incorporation des chiropraticiens au Québec : stratégies discursives et luttes professionnelles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dès les premiers moments de leur histoire, les chiropraticiens sont entrés en lutte contre la médecine allopathique. En même temps que celui du Code des professions, un projet de loi instituant une corporation des chiropraticiens était déposé en 1971. Autour de ce projet de loi vont s'engager des luttes discursives entre le groupe des opposants et les promoteurs du projet cherchant l'accession aux prérogatives professionnelles. En produisant un discours à la fois non orthodoxe et conforme aux grandes dimensions de l'image professionnelle, les chiropraticiens ont pu convaincre le législateur de la légitimité de leurs prétentions. L'appui populaire à leur pratique apparaît également un facteur important de leur succès. L'étude met en œuvre le modèle d'analyse des stratégies discursives de Pierre Ansart.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".