Réseau primaire et santé mentale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les résultats d'une recherche sur l'application systématique de l'intervention en réseau comme réponse thérapeutique aux demandes de soins de 20 clients non présélectionnés d'une clinique externe de psychiatrie ont démontré que cette approche était utilisable dans un contexte de prise en charge de secteur. L'analyse détaillée de nos résultats indique également certaines tendances quant aux bénéfices additionnels de cette approche communautaire. En effet, les clients qui ont accepté l'intervention en réseau1 (les 2/3) se sont améliorés sur le plan de la symptomatologie, mais aussi au niveau de leur satisfaction personelle et de leur vie sociale, alors que ceux qui ont accepté une approche individuelle, ûe couple ou de famille, mais sans intervention en réseau, ont vu leur amélioration se limiter au plan de la symptomatologie, sans amélioration correspondante de leur satisfaction personnelle ou de leur vie sociale.
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 | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.002 |
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".