MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132262738 · doi:10.7202/1028785ar

L’intégration des nouveaux préposés aux bénéficiaires dans les organisations gériatriques au Québec : la santé au travail au risque des temporalités

2015· article· fr· W2132262738 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
François Aubry

Bibliographic record

VenuePhronesis · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Health and Safety Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’objectif de cet article est d’expliquer en quoi l’intégration des nouveaux préposés aux bénéficiaires dans les organisations gériatriques au Québec doit être considérée comme un processus problématique en termes de santé et sécurité du travail. Notre article prend appui sur les données d’une étude qualitative menée en 2012 dans deux organisations gériatriques du Québec. Nous montrons comment les nouvelles recrues apprennent à devoir respecter deux normes organisationnelles difficilement conciliables : l’une concerne le respect de la charge de travail prescrite; l’autre a trait à la qualité du travail. Nous montrons ensuite en quoi les stratégies de prudence détiennent une place majeure dans la protection des nouvelles recrues face aux risques inhérents à l’organisation. Enfin, nous référençons les causes pouvant jouer un rôle dans la fragilisation du processus de transmission de ces stratégies.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.333 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhronesisSame topicOccupational Health and Safety ResearchFrench-language works237,207