MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2605220379 · doi:10.7202/1039039ar

Le critère de la dangerosité et l’admission involontaire du patient mineur en matière de santé mentale : une impasse pour la pédopsychiatrie?

2017· article· fr· W2605220379 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Nicholas Léger-Riopel

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Université de Moncton · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicHealthcare Decision-Making and Restraints
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La législation concernant la santé mentale dans une variété de juridictions, bien souvent inscrites dans la tradition juridique de Common Law, prévoit la prise en compte d’un critère de dangerosité lorsqu’il est question de l’admission psychiatrique dite « involontaire » d’un patient. Ce texte proposera tout d’abord, la prise en compte du contexte tout particulier qui a mené à l’émergence du critère de la dangerosité comme standard communément utilisé pour juger du caractère justifié de l’admission psychiatrique dite involontaire d’un patient. La partie II identifiera certains obstacles, épistémologiques par nature, identifiés par la littérature s’agissant des limites à l’(in)capacité de la psychiatrie d’établir un risque futur de dangerosité chez un patient. Dans la dernière section, nous évaluerons de quelle manière le critère de la dangerosité trouve une application médico-légale chez l’enfant et les jeunes, tout en soulevant les risques liés à l’adoption d’une norme de l’anormal lors de l’évaluation pédopsychiatrique du patient.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Université de MonctonSame topicHealthcare Decision-Making and RestraintsFrench-language works237,207