MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125942477 · doi:10.3917/tf.093.0379

Y a-t-il une place pour la psychothérapie individuelle en systémique ?

2009· article· fr· W2125942477 on OpenAlexaff
Christel Vaudan, Barbara Tripet, Antoinette Corboz‐Warnery, Nicolas Duruz

Bibliographic record

VenueThérapie Familiale · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling, Therapy, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCegep de Trois-Rivieres
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPhilosophyPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La clinique systémique est trop souvent identifiée à la thérapie de couple ou de famille au détriment de la psychothérapie individuelle. Cet article présente les résultats d’un groupe de travail de thérapeutes systémiciens qui ont longuement réfléchi à cette question. Après une revue bibliographique commentée sur le sujet, il propose un certain nombre de points critiques concernant la clinique de la psychothérapie individuelle d’orientation systémique.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.012
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThérapie FamilialeSame topicCounseling, Therapy, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207