Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le contexte social hétérocissexiste entraîne des expériences de transphobie pour les personnes trans, influençant leur bien-être. Cependant, elles font face à plusieurs barrières lors de l’accès aux services en santé mentale, en plus de vivre de la discrimination au sein de ces derniers. Afin de prévenir de telles situations, cet article témoigne des expériences et réflexions de neuf personnes trans sur l’intervention transaffirmative, recueillies dans le cadre d’une maîtrise en travail social (UQÀM). Les résultats obtenus, lorsque combinés à la théorie de la reconnaissance d’Honneth, permettent de tracer les impératifs à l’intervention transaffirmative en santé mentale, c’est-à-dire de se décentrer de l’expérience hétérocissexiste, de rendre les milieux transinclusifs en collaboration avec les communautés directement concernées, et de mettre en pratique l’approche de consentement éclairé.
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 | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".