Sur la contribution des personnes utilisatrices de services de santé mentale en tant que partenaires d’enseignement en psychiatrie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le Collège royal des médecins et chirurgiens du Canada prévoit qu’au terme de leur formation, les résidents en psychiatrie pourront agir efficacement en tant que promoteurs de la santé. Ce commentaire présente une analyse d’entrevues réalisées dans le cadre d’un perfectionnement professionnel auprès d’experts mondialement reconnus du rétablissement en santé mentale. À la lumière de la Charte d’Ottawa pour la promotion de la santé, il en ressort que des personnes utilisatrices de services de santé mentale peuvent être de précieux partenaires d’enseignement à la fois en matière de promotion de la santé et de rétablissement. Le recours à des patients partenaires d’enseignement en psychiatrie peut également représenter une stratégie de lutte à la stigmatisation et aux préjugés en favorisant davantage de réciprocité entre les professionnels et les personnes traitées.
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 | 0.007 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".