De l’Italie au Québec : implications de la réforme psychiatrique italienne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article has two aims: 1) to help in the understanding of the much discussed Italian reform in psychiatry. 2) to offer for review, discussion or action, a certain number of implications uncovered by this reform with regard to the ongoing discussions on the reorganization of Mental Health Services in Quebec. On the first aim, the key message is as follows: it is possible to create another psychiatry if society in general and those actually participating really want such a project. On the second aim, the main conditions of success for a global and deinstitutionalized psychiatry seem to be as follows: Sufficient resources, freedom to develop policies (a deep decentralisation of the decision making process and the organization) that are central to the integration of the services in a given territory; a dedicated study of the culture and the local social live; a continuous presence (intime and space) of the service in the territory; a total response (and deinstitu-tionalization) to the patient's needs; a democratic team work. However, there are no miracles in Italy; in the cooled down society of the 80's there is room for experimentation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
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".