MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322975016 · doi:10.3406/oss.2002.877

Facteurs associés aux variations géographiques des taux d'hospitalisation au Québec : l'offre de services et les caractéristiques socio-économiques des populations

2002· article· fr· W2322975016 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jacques Piché

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté Société et Solidarité · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'existence de variations importantes de l'utilisation des servi ces médico-hospitaliers entre les territoires géographiques a fait l'objet de nombreuses études. Cet article porte sur les facteurs explicatifs de ces variations en distinguant les rôles respectifs de l'offre en ressources hospitalières en regard des facteurs qui témoignent de l'état de santé et des caractéristiques socio-économiques des populations. Les données ont été recueillies sur les populations de 163 zones résidentielles du Québec. Les variations des taux standardisés d'hospitalisation ont été mises en relation avec une mesure d'accessibilité géographique aux ressources en lits ainsi qu'avec différentes variables caractérisant les populations: espérance de vie, taux de sousscolarisation, revenu moyen des ménages, taux de chômage, etc. Les résultats de l'étude permettent d'appuyer l'hypothèse d'un lien causal entre les besoins des populations et leur niveau de consommation. Toutefois, cette relation semble fragile: lorsque les écarts d'accessibilité sont importants, le rôle des besoins diminue rapidement alors que celui de l'offre devient déterminant.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSanté Société et SolidaritéSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207