MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334948542 · doi:10.3406/oss.2002.895

Le système québécois d’aide et de soins aux personnes âgées

2002· article· en· W2334948542 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lysette Trahan, Patricia Caris

Bibliographic record

VenueSanté Société et Solidarité · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutonomyReferralDiversification (marketing strategy)PopulationBusinessNursingPolitical sciencePublic relationsEconomic growthMedicineEnvironmental healthMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the early 1970s, Canada has had a public health system that guarantees free, universal access to hospital and medical services to all Canadians. The same values and principles have governed the organization of Quebec’s health and social services, including long-term care and services. Over the years, there have been changes within the Quebec system in order to better adapt services to new realities. There has been a diversification of services with greater emphasis on support for persons in the community and provision of services close to people’s living environment. Mechanisms have also been established to improve clinical evaluation of the needs of individuals and systematize the referral and admission to residential centres. Nevertheless, adjustments are needed to address emerging trends in changing needs: increased needs due to the substantial rise in the number of elderly persons but also needs that are different from those of the younger population for whom the system was designed. The new Quebec policy on long-term care is based on a different conception of the organization of services for elderly persons with decreasing autonomy and on the assumption that there will be major changes in the way things are done.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.831
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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