L’évolution récente du système de santé et de services sociaux : étapes et enjeux
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the recommendations of the Commission of study on health services and social services (2000) (The Clair Commission), as well as much reflection and several consultations aimed at adapting Quebec’s health and social services system to the challenges confronting it, many legislative and administrative changes have been introduced in recent years which have substantially modified the organization and governance of services. Measures have been implemented to promote better access to services and a better integration of services into functional networks, precisions have been made concerning the responsibilities of the various bodies and means have been put in place to make organizations more concretely accountable through a more results-based approach to management. In 2006, legislative amendments have allowed for a mechanism to be put in place with regard to improving the management of access to specialized services in the public system and guidelines have been introduced to better manage the supply of services in the private sector. More recently, the report of the Task Force on the Funding of the Health System (2008) (the Castonguay Report) prompted the health ministry and the Government of Quebec to come up with some structuring means of increasing the productivity and performance of the system. Despite these changes, the recurring issues pose a major challenge to the long-term viability of the system.
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 | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".