MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954824907 · doi:10.3917/dev.191.0055

Le Cercle de sécurité parental, ou l’importance d’améliorer les représentations parentales : deux études de cas

2019· article· fr· W2954824907 on OpenAlexaff
Claud Bisaillon, Zoé Richard-Fortier, Johanna Navarro

Bibliographic record

VenueDevenir · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l'Est-de-l'Île-de-MontréalHôpital Charles-Le Moyne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPsychologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le Cercle de sécurité parental (COS-P ; Cooper, Hoffman et Powell, 2009) vise à favoriser un attachement sécurisant chez le jeune enfant en aidant les parents à mieux reconnaître les besoins d’attachement de leur enfant et à développer leur fonction réflexive parentale (FRP). Des études de cas incluant des mesures pré-test, post-est et relance permettent de constater qu’une mère a démontré une augmentation importante de sa FRP, de pair avec une amélioration plus importante de ses représentations parentales, alors que de tels progrès n’ont pas été observés chez l’autre mère. Ces résultats appuient l’indication de COS-P pour une population à faible risque.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.366 · 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 designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevenirSame topicAttachment and Relationship DynamicsFrench-language works237,207