MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520661418 · doi:10.7202/1038109ar

Entre nous, le cancer : monde du travail et dynamiques familiales autour de l’enfant gravement malade

2016· article· fr· W2520661418 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marc-Antoine Berthod, Yannis Papadaniel, Nicole Brzak

Bibliographic record

VenueEnfances Familles Générations · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Policies and Family
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhysicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lorsqu’un enfant tombe gravement malade, ses parents doivent réaménager leur mode de conciliation entre sphère privée et sphère professionnelle afin d’articuler au mieux travail, famille et soins. Cet article se fonde sur une recherche anthropologique menée en Suisse durant plus de trois ans auprès de parents, de proches, de collègues et de supérieurs hiérarchiques pour analyser les incidences que ces réaménagements produisent tant sur le monde du travail que sur les dynamiques familiales. S’appuyant sur l’exemple helvétique où les personnes salariées n’ont droit qu’à trois jours pour organiser la garde de leur enfant malade, il documente les pouvoirs discrétionnaires qui sont à l’œuvre entre employés et employeurs dans ces situations, ce qui induit une gestion au cas par cas. Ce constat, loin de se limiter aux pays qui n’ont pas mis en place de mesures légales de soutien à ces parents, dénote une faille des arrangements contemporains entre État, entreprises et familles dans la prise en charge des enfants, en particulier ceux qui sont malades du cancer ; cette faille s’opère au détriment de ces parents.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnfances Familles GénérationsSame topicSocial Policies and FamilyFrench-language works237,207