MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112137696 · doi:10.1016/j.alter.2014.06.002

Ces hommes qui prennent soin d’autrui

2014· article· fr· W2112137696 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAlter · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policies and Family
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Ministry of Community and Social Services
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article présente six cas de figure dans lesquels un homme est l’aidant d’un membre de sa famille en situation de handicap. Dans trois cas, il s’agit de sa conjointe, dans les autres cas, de l’un de ses enfants d’âge adulte. L’article cherche à comprendre comment ces hommes se sont trouvés dans cette position d’aidant, cinq fois sur six dans la position d’aidant principal, et s’il existe un mode masculin des pratiques d’aide. Les cas ont été choisis parmi trente-sept cas étudiés lors des post-enquêtes Histoire de Vie – Construction identitaire (INSEE, 2003) et Handicap Santé Ménage – Handicap Santé Aidants (INSEE, 2008). Les études de cas ont constitué le volet qualitatif d’une étude générale concernant l’aide au masculin comprenant un volet quantitatif (Banens & Marcellini, 2015). Les résultats suggèrent que le handicap a tendance à réactiver un modèle traditionnel de genre, impliquant une plus forte interdépendance intrafamiliale. Les hommes aidants semblent consentir à cette interdépendance accrue, qu’ils investissent dans le rôle du protecteur plutôt que de l’infirmier.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.552
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.294
Teacher spread0.274 · 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