De l’espoir dans le tragique. Quand l’agir procure du sens à une vie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experience of illness causes disorientation, a loss of meaning, and a loss of freedom to act. In other words, the entire field of practical possibilities diminishes, resulting in action being viewed as something impossible. In this case, the question is the following: Can the nurse contribute to maintaining hope for a life that is rich in meaning, adjusted to the limits imposed by the patient’s illness? To explore the answer to this question, we propose a humanistic model of accompaniment that enables nurses to restore hope and power to persons in vulnerable situations. In examining the best-case and the worst-case scenarios that a vulnerable person could be faced with, the accompaniment method proposed places emphasis on the exploration of practical interventions that could foster the best-case scenario and reduce the risk and the consequences of the worst-case scenario. By working on certain pragmatic aspects, we find that life becomes meaningful according to the use we can make of it, taking into account what we can actually do.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".