Relever Le Défi Des Plans De Services Individualisés (PSI) Au Québec: Leçons Tirées De L'Expérience Des équipes D'Intervention Jeunesse (éIJ)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente les résultats d'une analyse visant à déterminer de quelle façon les équipes d'intervention jeunesse (ÉIJ), une initiative expérimentale de coordination de services implantée par le ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux du Québec en 2003, facilitent l'élaboration des plans de services individualisés (PSI). L'analyse, de type qualitatif, s'est fortement inspirée de la méthode de la théorisation ancrée (« Grounded Theory ») (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Les données ont été recueillies à l'aide d'entretiens semi-structurés, administrés à une vaste gamme de participants directement impliqués dans l'initiative. Les résultats de l'analyse soulignent le rôle central joué par le coordonnateur ou la coordinatrice des ÉIJ dans l'élaboration des PSI de même que l'importance de la structure et des ressources procurées par les équipes.
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 | 0.008 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".