L’internement : regards croisés Suisse, Belgique, France, Québec. Risque et consentement en psychiatrie contrainte
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BERNHEIMProfesseure titulaire à la Section de droit civil de la Faculté de droit de l'Université d'Ottawa Titulaire de la Chaire de recherche du Canada en santé mentale et accès à la justice La régulation des pratiques de contrainte en psychiatrie est actuellement en pleine évolution et en pleine redéfinition.D'une part, la reconnaissance des droits et la nécessité d'établir des mécanismes de surveillance de leur mise en œuvre a mené plusieurs juridictions à modifier leurs cadres législatifs pour y introduire des processus judiciaires ou administratifs.D'autre part, la gestion hospitalière ayant mené aux coupures de plusieurs services et de lits psychiatriques, le développement de mécanismes de contrôle à l'extérieur des hôpitaux est devenu une réalité qui devait être juridiquement encadrée.Ces tendances internationales 1 ont 1 Voir par ex.au Chili : D. MINOLETTI et al., « Strengthening Efforts to Integrate Mental Health into
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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".