Bientôt vingt ans de régionalisation : qu’ont donc eu à faire les C.R.S.S.S.?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Une étude a été menée afin d'établir l'importance relative du processus de régionalisation dans le domaine de la santé et des services sociaux au Québec de 1971 à 1987. Les différents mandats confiés aux C.R.S.S.S. par le gouvernement du Québec durant cette période ont été recensés et analysés à l'aide d'une grille à cinq niveaux permettant d'en juger l'importance relative. Chacun des niveaux fait référence à des substrats (ressources humaines, matérielles, monétaires, information, etc.) différents. De plus, chaque niveau distingue trois types de pouvoir : de recommandation, de coordination et de commandement. L'examen auquel ont été soumis les mandats confiés aux C.R.S.S.S. depuis 1971 permet de conclure que le processus de régionalisation a connu des hauts et des bas s'apparentant davantage à une valse-hésitation qu'à une véritable politique de décentralisation.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".