MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

« Outil thérapeutique », « Advil® scolaire » ou « doping » ?

2021· article· fr· W3177145378 on OpenAlex
Marie‐Christine Brault, Guillaume Beaulieu

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSocio-anthropologie · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmbivalenceMedical prescriptionMedicineHumanitiesPsychologyPolitical scienceArtSocial psychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’ampleur de la consommation de médicaments spécifiques au Trouble du déficit de l’attention avec ou sans hyperactivité (TDAH) chez les enfants québécois préoccupe. Alors que des professionnels de la santé dénoncent la situation, ils se retrouvent également au cœur des revendications en tant que prescripteurs. Notre analyse qualitative suivant les principes de la théorisation enracinée révèle que les professionnels de la santé sont très critiques de la société de performance, mais sensibles à la pression exercée par les parents, l’école et les autres professionnels de la santé. Ils se montrent aussi ambivalents à l’égard du diagnostic et des médicaments spécifiques au TDAH. Par conséquent, leurs pratiques de prescription sont hétérogènes. Trois cas de figure émergent de l’analyse et mettent en valeur que certaines de leurs pratiques renforcent la pharmaceuticalisation, alors que d’autres lui offrent une résistance.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.004

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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.314 · 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