MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2762995689 · doi:10.1093/pch/16.7.414a

Le système de justice pour les adolescents et la santé : un argument contre les modifications proposées à la Loi sur le système de justice pénale chez les adolescents

2011· article· fr· W2762995689 on OpenAlexaffabout
April Elliott, Debra K. Katzman

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatrics & Child Health · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare
Canadian institutionsCanadian Paediatric Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La Société canadienne de pédiatrie s'inquiète profondément des effets négatifs sur la santé développementale, psychologique et affective des jeunes contrevenants si la Loi sur le système de justice pénale pour les adolescents est modifiée tel qu'il est proposé. Les modifications de la loi canadienne sur la justice pénale chez les adolescents, qui prévoient des sentences plus sévères chez les jeunes de 14 ans ou plus condamnés pour de graves infractions avec violence, sont contraires à la Convention relative aux droits de l'enfant des Nations Unies. Le fait de traiter les adolescents comme des adultes pose de graves risques sur leur santé et leurs droits humains, y compris les traumatismes, la violence et les agressions, et nuit à leur développement global. De plus, le taux de maladie mentale est plus élevé chez les jeunes en détention préventive. Les adolescents devraient purger leur sentence seulement dans un établissement qui leur est réservé et qui tient compte de leurs droits, ainsi que de leurs besoins mentaux, physiques, développementaux et sur le plan de la formation.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0050.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatrics & Child HealthSame topicEthics and Legal Issues in Pediatric HealthcareFrench-language works237,207