Fighting neglect and abuse and promoting good and adequate care of older people. An analytical look at public policies in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis plus de trente ans, divers documents publics, soit des politiques sociales ou des textes d’orientations produits par des organismes gouvernementaux, traitent de la question de la maltraitance envers les personnes ainees. Dans un contexte de changement attendu, soit le depot public du premier plan d’action gouvernementale de lutte contre la maltraitance, prevu pour juin 2010, il est d’actualite d’analyser ces documents a la lumiere de la promotion de la bientraitance et de la lutte contre la maltraitance. Cet article propose une analyse critique du contenu de quatre documents d’orientation generale et de cinq documents traitant explicitement de la lutte contre la maltraitance afin de poser comment, au Quebec, on adresse ces questions. Serons mis en exergue les points de croisement ainsi que les vocables utilises pour poser le probleme et amorcer des pistes de solution.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".