MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088650447 · doi:10.7202/045031ar

Autodétermination et résilience en réadaptation avec l’outil Priorités d’intervention du client (PIC)

2010· article· fr· W2088650447 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Eduardo Cisneros, Audrey‐Kristel Barbeau, Gilles Charette, Geneviève Léveillé, Michelle McKerral

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontières · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article présente la façon dont l’outil interdisciplinaire Priorités d’intervention du client (PIC) fait appel à la résilience et à l’autodétermination soutenant le client dans le choix de ses objectifs d’intervention. Le PIC a été développé en contexte de réadaptation pour des personnes ayant un traumatisme craniocérébral. Il s’agit toutefois d’un outil interdisciplinaire, non spécifique à une discipline, à une clientèle ou à un contexte clinique, qui permet à diverses clientèles de cibler leurs priorités d’intervention ainsi que leurs forces, favorisant ainsi l’actualisation de leurs capacités d’adaptation et de résilience.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.406
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.355 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontièresSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207