MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Envisager l’improbable, contourner l’inconcevable : histoires (de fin) de vie en hémato-oncologie pédiatrique montréalais

2021· article· fr· W3207872779 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvie Fortin, Sabrina Lessard, Josiane Le Gall

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et santé · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicPalliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Canadian institutionsCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGynecologyHumanitiesPalliative carePolitical scienceMedicinePhilosophyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En hématologie-oncologie pédiatrique, les technologies et les avancées médicales génèrent de multiples voies quant aux possibilités thérapeutiques. Ces possibilités et les espoirs qu’elles suscitent s’invitent comme acteurs dans la prise de décision. Parallèlement, les complications inhérentes aux traitements de pointe (greffes hématopoïétiques) sont nombreuses et la mort, une éventualité. À partir d’histoires d’enfants, de parents et de cliniciens, recueillies au cours d’une enquête ethnographique réalisée dans une unité d’hématologie-oncologie dans un hôpital pédiatrique à Montréal, nous discutons du processus de prise de décision lors de pronostics sombres et des défis posés par le passage d’une trajectoire thérapeutique à visée curative à celle ayant une perspective palliative. Nous questionnons la prise de décision partagée (patient/famille/médecin) et le rôle moral des cliniciens dans un contexte où les « morts spontanées » surviennent rarement et où l’option de prolonger la vie à tout prix rivalise avec la médecine palliative.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.027
Scholarly communication0.0100.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.087
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.376 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et santéSame topicPalliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesFrench-language works237,207