MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148378901 · doi:10.7202/030379ar

Composantes d’efficacité des programmes de traitement communautaires destinés aux personnes souffrant de désordres mentaux

2006· article· fr· W2148378901 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sheilagh Hodgins, Louise Gaston

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté mentale au Québec · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policies and Family
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les programmes communautaires visent à aider les bénéficiaires à s'intégrer de façon permanente au sein de la collectivité. Pour ce faire, ces programmes doivent être constitués de multiples composantes qui visent à réduire ou à éliminer les difficultés présentées par ces personnes. Ces composantes sont : des chimiothérapies; des interventions visant à encourager une prise régulière des médicaments jugés nécessaires; les mécanismes de formation susceptibles d'aider tant le personnel que les patients à évaluer la symptomatologie; une relation stable; des mécanismes permettant d'inculquer aux patients les aptitudes sociales dont ils ont besoin; des programmes de formation professionnelle visant à permettre aux patients de se trouver un emploi ou d'exercer une activité significative; des mécanismes de formation visant à enseigner aux patients les aptitudes pouvant les aider à faire face au stress et à résoudre leurs problèmes; des interventions destinées à les aider à réduire leur consommation d'alcool; des milieux résidentiel, social et communautaire propices à l'amélioration de l'état des patients, afin que ceux-ci puissent accomplir des progrès soutenus et durables.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté mentale au QuébecSame topicSocial Policies and FamilyFrench-language works237,207