L’INTERVENTION EN MAISON D’HÉBERGEMENT AUPRÈS DES FEMMES IMMIGRANTES VICTIMES DE VIOLENCE CONJUGALE : UNE ANALYSE INTERSECTIONNELLE DES PRATIQUES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article présente les résultats d’une recherche qualitative qui explore, à partir de la perspective féministe intersectionnelle, les points de vue d’intervenantes des maisons d’hébergement du Québec sur leurs pratiques d’intervention auprès des femmes immigrantes victimes de violence conjugale, ainsi que sur les facteurs qui influencent ces pratiques. La collecte de données a été réalisée par le biais de cinq groupes focalisés répartis dans quatre régions du Québec : Montréal, Québec, Sherbrooke et Gatineau. Trente-trois intervenantes issues de maisons d’hébergement pour femmes violentées ont participé à la recherche. L’analyse des résultats a permis de dégager deux thèmes principaux autour desquels s’articulent les discours des intervenantes au sujet de leurs pratiques : la nature de ces pratiques en contexte de diversité culturelle et les facteurs qui les modulent.
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 | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".