Intervention en contexte de radicalisation menant à la violence : une approche clinique multidisciplinaire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives This manuscript provides a first description of a specialized clinical work addressing the radicalization leading to violence phenomenon in Canada. Since July 2016, a multidisciplinary clinical team attached to a mental health and primary care program in Montreal proposes specialized consultations to support partners across Quebec.Methods This paper describes the clinical team approach, the consultation service organization and illustrates through clinical vignettes the main categories of social and clinical problems referred to the team during its first year of operation.Results Our preliminary observations confirm the relevance of a multidisciplinary assessment based on a systemic approach to the phenomenon of violent radicalization to provide an understanding of the different social, family and individual factors associated and to formulate a psychosocial and/or psychiatric intervention plan.Conclusion The presentation of clinical cases proposes to the social, community and mental health actors an understanding of the phenomenon of violent radicalization as it manifests in the health, youth protection and educational networks in Quebec and suggest intervention perspectives.
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 | 0.049 | 0.051 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".