Issues related to depression and its treatment: Social representations from patients, professionals and students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le but principal de cette etude est d’examiner les representations de la depression a travers trois enjeux sociaux entourant son traitement : 1-la hausse des consultations relatives a la depression, 2-la hausse des prescriptions d’antidepresseurs et 3-les difficultes d’adhesion aux traitements antidepresseurs. Ces representations sociales ont ete etudiees a l’aide d’un questionnaire proposant des raisons pour expliquer la presence de ces trois phenomenes. Les participants sont 43 patients depressifs, 92 professionnels de la sante mentale (omnipraticiens, psychiatres, psychologues) et 350 etudiants universitaires provenant du Quebec. Les resultats font emerger des representations consensuelles a travers les groupes ainsi que des positionnements distinctifs en fonction des enjeux particuliers. Les resultats sont globalement coherents avec l’orientation des principes organisateurs, la theorie de l’implication et la fonction identitaire des representations sociales.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".