Proposition de lignes directrices pour la formation à l’offre active des futurs professionnelles et professionnels en santé et en service social oeuvrant en situation francophone minoritaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente des lignes directrices qui guident la formation des futurs professionnelles et professionnels des services sociaux et de santé dans le but d’inclure l’apprentissage du concept d’offre active de services dans les programmes universitaires et collégiaux de formation. Ce concept de soins et de services permet de mieux répondre aux besoins des communautés francophones en situation minoritaire. Fondées sur une recension d’écrits et les résultats d’un sondage réalisé auprès du corps professoral des programmes francophones de santé et de service social au Canada, ces lignes directrices identifient les appuis nécessaires au niveau de l’institution, des facultés, des programmes d’études et du corps professoral pour cette intégration du concept d’offre active de services sociaux et de santé en français dans les programmes de formation.
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
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".