Familles, personnes adultes dépendantes et aide « naturelle » : entre le mythe et la réalité
Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir des témoignages recueillis auprès de plus de 70 soignantes, l’article évoque ce que recouvre le travail de prise en charge d’un-e proche adulte dépendant-e. En choisissant l’expression « travail de soins » pour décrire cette réalité, les auteurs s’inscrivent en faux contre la représentation de la prise en charge familiale vue comme une « aide naturelle » caractérisée par la spontanéité, l’improvisation, l’absence d’évaluation et de perspective. Au contraire, ils montrent que cette aide constitue un véritable travail de soins requérant des conditions, des connaissances et des capacités d’organisation particulières, qu’elle s’apparente à maints égards au travail des intervenants et intervenantes de la santé et des services sociaux et a peu à voir avec la conception naturaliste des soins. L’article contribue à une analyse critique de l’univers domestique.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".