3e Café de bioéthique « Le citoyen comme acteur de santé publique : défis et opportunités »
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce compte-rendu synthétise les échanges tenus lors du 3ème Café de bioéthique de 2019 à Québec, qui ont porté sur le thème : « Le citoyen comme acteur de santé publique : défis et opportunités ». Trois panélistes – Yan Kestens, Allison Marchildon et Karine Lefeuvre – ont enrichi cette rencontre de leur expertise en santé publique et en éthique. Cet échange a fait ressortir la valeur de la participation citoyenne en santé publique et l’importance d’en nuancer sa compréhension et sa mise en application. Il est prioritaire de considérer les relations entre les différentes parties prenantes, les facteurs contextuels pouvant affecter ce processus et les stratégies éthiques permettant de renforcir de « bonnes » participations citoyennes. Cette rencontre s’inscrit dans une série de Cafés de bioéthique tenus à Montréal et à Québec sur le sujet de l’éthique, de la santé et des données.
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 | 0.030 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 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; 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".