MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119264167 · doi:10.7202/016936ar

Le risque de cancer du sein en France : un mode unique de prévention

2008· article· fr· W2119264167 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marie Ménoret

Bibliographic record

VenueSociologie et sociétés · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Historical and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article porte sur l’élaboration du risque de cancer du sein en France et sur ses conséquences sociales. Il s’appuie sur des données historiques et sociologiques pour tracer l’évolution de sa prévention, de la fin du xix e siècle aux tests contemporains de prédisposition génétique. Il montre que la détection précoce s’est imposée comme la technique d’excellence de prévention du cancer du sein, dans un monde où les thérapeutiques évoluent peu en matière de guérison, d’une part, et dans lequel les discours alternatifs n’ont eu que très peu d’audience auprès des publics concernés, d’autre part. Basée exclusivement sur le dépistage, l’entreprise française de prévention du cancer du sein a progressivement transformé des personnes en bonne santé en patientes asymptomatiques — dans un processus de médicalisation du risque — et des populations ciblées de femmes en population à risque — dans un processus de naturalisation du même risque. L’entreprise de surveillance qui organise cette situation est l’oeuvre d’une autonomie médicale qui légitime un « faute de mieux », en l’absence de remède efficace.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.175
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociologie et sociétésSame topicFrench Historical and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207