Vers de nouvelles formes de prise en charge en santé mentale : Quels freins et conditions de réussite ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le secteur de la sant mentale connat un certain nombre de difficults et dysfonctionnements Diverses analyses scientifiques et oprationnelles, au plan international, incitent explorer de nouveaux modles de prise en charge, permettant une approche plus globale et mieux coordonne, s'appuyant notamment sur l'imbrication des soins et des services sociaux et mdico-sociaux. Cet article examine, partir d'un cadre thorique interdisciplinaire (sant publique, psychiatrie, management et organisation) et d'une tude de cas approfondie, en quoi la mise en oeuvre d'un dispositif structurel et managrial innovant et s'efforant de rpondre des besoins identifis, peut se heurter des obstacles tels que des formes de conservatisme socital et diverses manifestations de rsistance au changement. Ainsi, cette recherche exploratoire met en avant d'une part la faisabilit et l'opportunit de nouveaux modles de prise en charge du patient en sant mentale, et galement les dfis surmonter et les conditions de russite de ce type d'volution.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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; 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".