Le risque de la parole dans l’annonce de l’inéluctable
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’annonce d’un pronostic défavorable est l’une des situations les plus difficiles dans la relation entre un médecin et son patient. Cette situation sera considérée ici en tant que cas paradigmatique des enjeux éthiques inhérents à cette relation professionnelle particulière. Nous examinerons ce qu’implique le jeu fluctuant des rôles et des attentes dans la relation médecin-patient, et son statut instable dans notre culture professionnelle qui oscille entre deux pôles contradictoires : la préservation de l’identité personnelle du patient et le désir paradoxal de ce dernier d’être pris en charge. Que veut le patient : un médecin décideur, souvent qualifié de paternaliste ou un médecin informateur, souvent jugé indifférent et insensible ? Entre ces deux extrêmes, et par-delà le libellé formel qu’est l’obligation d’informer, se trouve l’exigence d’une éthique de la communication.
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 | 0.014 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".