MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133220498 · doi:10.7202/1017479ar

L’évaluation des services sociaux et de santé offerts aux minorités sexuelles par le CSSS Jeanne-Mance

2013· article· fr· W2133220498 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jean Dumas

Bibliographic record

VenueService social · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Canadian institutionsThe Quebec Population Health Research Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au Québec, l’adaptation des services sociaux et de santé aux besoins en matière de santé des minorités sexuelles demeure peu documentée. Une recherche-action participative, menée au Centre de santé et de services sociaux (CSSS) Jeanne-Mance, à Montréal, s’est donnée comme objectif de mesurer l’adéquation des services de ce CSSS avec les besoins des personnes lesbiennes, gaies, bisexuelles, transgenres et transsexuelles (LGBT). La première phase de la recherche visait à documenter, à l’aide d’entretiens avec des informateurs clés, les enjeux liés à l’adaptation des services. Mis à part l’examen des pratiques déjà développées au CSSS pour répondre à leurs besoins, on retrouve parmi les éléments à considérer la question de l’accueil, le processus d’identification des besoins, les techniques de communication pour développer le lien de confiance de même que les besoins spécifiques à chacun des sous-groupes parmi les minorités sexuelles. L’article soulève également la nécessité de considérer l’amélioration de la formation du personnel et les risques et bénéfices de services spécifiques destinés à ces populations.

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)0.020
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.345 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueService socialSame topicLGBTQ Health, Identity, and PolicyFrench-language works237,207