L’accès des indigents aux services de santé au Burkina Faso : un problème public ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Burkina Faso, comme dans bien d’autres pays d’Afrique, les indigents demeurent exclus de l’accès aux services de santé, malgré la mise en oeuvre de politiques publiques qui s’étaient, entre autres objectifs, fixé celui d’améliorer leur sort. L’une des propositions d’explication à cette occultation de l’équité par les acteurs sociaux impliqués dans la mise en oeuvre de ces politiques est que la situation d’exclusion des indigents n’est pas comprise comme un problème public auquel une solution doit être trouvée. À l’aide d’une enquête de type socioanthropologique de terrain et d’un cadre d’analyse des politiques publiques, cet article vise à vérifier cette proposition au moyen de données empiriques recueillies lors d’une étude de cas au Burkina Faso. Ces données sont organisées en fonction des neuf composantes qui, conceptuellement, permettent de comprendre la manière dont une situation peut devenir un problème public.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".