Universalisme proportionné : vers une « égalité réelle » de la prévention en France ?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although their design may feature a considerable amount of universalism, prevention strategies often produce results that are socially and/or spatially differentiated. This differentiation process can induce social or territorial gradients of access to and/or effectiveness of prevention and, in turn, worsen health inequalities. This process also accentuates the gap between the principles of certain public policies and their practical implementation, raising the question of the real benefit of these policies for beneficiaries. Although Sir Marmot considers proportionate universalism to be a strategy to tackle health inequalities, the practical modalities of implementation of this principle have been rarely described in the literature until very recently. This pragmatic paper therefore presents a causal analysis of differentiation processes, underlines the need for self-reflexive prevention strategies, and investigates practical implications of proportionate universalism.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 it