From a context of patient care partnership possible for each patient, to the professionalization of patients for the general interest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the manifestations of the power of patients, relatives and citizens to act concerning their health and participation in the general interest that more and more of them over time is now recognized by some authors as asocial fact, by others like the blockbuster of the 21st century, is noted by the number of publications on the subject at the global level because produced in an anthropogenic way. The aim of this article is first to describe the contours of what has developed in terms of patient postures and qualifications in recent decades before proposing the lines of research that appear necessary to frame and promote the development of what has been recommended by the World Health Organization for more than three decades. L’une des manifestations du pouvoir d’agir des patients, proches et citoyens concernant leur santé et leur participation à l’intérêt général est aujourd’hui reconnue par certains auteurs et définie comme un fait social, par d’autres comme le blockbuster du 21e siècle. Et ceci se constate par le nombre de publications sur le sujet au niveau mondial car produites à un rythme anthropique. Cet article se propose dans un premier temps de décrire les contours de ce qui s’est constitué en terme de postures et qualifications de patients ces dernières décennies avant de proposer les pistes de recherche qui apparaissent nécessaires pour encadrer et favoriser le développement de ce qui est recommandé par l’Organisation Mondiale de la Santé depuis plus de trois décennies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".