Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les infirmières forment au Québec le groupe de professionnels de la santé le plus important, largement reconnu par le public. Or, cette reconnaissance n’est pas allée de soi. L’histoire des sciences infirmières, qui s’échelonne sur près de 100 ans, est révélatrice des transformations profondes dans la professionnalisation de la discipline et de l’implication des femmes. D’une formalisation des savoirs tardive à l’émergence d’une discipline académique, les sciences infirmières ouvrent la première grande carrière universitaire aux femmes. Ce livre retrace les enjeux et la genèse de cette nouvelle discipline qu’on appelait alors le nursing. Il permet de mieux comprendre les différentes facettes de l’histoire de l’éducation supérieure durant le siècle dernier et du rôle important qu’y ont joué les Soeurs Grises. Une brillante analyse des processus qui ont conduit de la période de réforme des soins infirmiers à celle de l’instauration de la Faculté des sciences infirmières de l’Université de Montréal.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.018 |
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".