MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111729921 · doi:10.7202/039319ar

Vieilliront-ils un jour ? Les baby-boomers aidants face à leur vieillissement

2010· article· fr· W2111729921 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Laure Blein, Jean‐Pierre Lavoie, Nancy Guberman, Ignace Olazabal

Bibliographic record

VenueLien social et Politiques · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicGlobal Health Care Issues
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtBaby boomPolitical scienceSociologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au Québec, un nombre grandissant de personnes aidantes sont issues du baby-boom. Au cours d’entrevues portant sur leur expérience d’aidant, nous les avons questionnées sur leur perception de la vieillesse et du vieillissement, afin de faire ressortir plus spécifiquement leur discours au sujet de leur propre vieillissement, les façons dont elles s’y préparent et les exigences énoncées envers les services de santé et, plus particulièrement, les services publics, pour les accompagner dans un vieillissement qu’elles souhaitent radicalement différent de celui de leurs parents.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, 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 score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.385 · 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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLien social et PolitiquesSame topicGlobal Health Care IssuesFrench-language works237,207