MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087774038 · doi:10.3917/seve.045.0037

Marketing social et marketing social critique : quelle utilité pour la santé publique ?

2015· article· fr· W2087774038 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Karine Gallopel‐Morvan

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Tribunes de la santé · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPsychology of Social Influence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial marketingPolitical scienceHumanitiesArtPublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aux États-Unis, en Grande-Bretagne, au Canada, en Australie, etc., il est fréquent de s’appuyer sur la démarche et les principes du marketing social et du marketing social critique pour élaborer des programmes de prévention plus efficaces. L’objectif de cet article est de préciser les contours et la démarche de ces disciplines méconnues en France puis d’illustrer, en s’appuyant sur deux exemples, le rôle qu’elles peuvent jouer dans un contexte de santé publique (la prévention de l’obésité des adolescents pour le marketing social et le tabac et la e-cigarette pour le marketing social critique).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0070.055
Scholarly communication0.0240.014
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0080.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.370 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Tribunes de la santéSame topicPsychology of Social InfluenceFrench-language works237,207