MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Comparative Study of the Forms of Care Centers for Individuals in the Four Continents with Those in Morocco

2023· article· en· W4322731861 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aziz Kasmi, Bouzekri Touri, Khaoula Khennou, Hind Baba, Hind Bouzoubaa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hunan University Natural Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultidisciplinary approachPromotion (chess)Context (archaeology)Health careScarcityWork (physics)PopulationMental healthGeographyEconomic growthPolitical sciencePsychologySociologyDemographySocial sciencePsychiatryEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Morocco, the rate of people affected by psychological and mental disorders is increasing every year, especially in the school environment. This negatively affects the development of the country and the promotion of the population as well as their profitability in society, which is explained by the scarcity of existing care centers for individuals in Morocco. This work aims to summarize the literature regarding help centers for children, adolescents, and other people, suffering from psychological disorders. We carried out a comparative study that constitutes a very fruitful approach consisting of a comparison between the forms of care centers in Africa, such as Morocco, Europe, such as France, America, such as Canada, and the United States through the comparisons of the general criteria between each quoted country. The results showed that the Anglophone model is the most successful and can be taken as a model to follow in the Moroccan context. Based on the results of this scientific study, it is clear that it is necessary to introduce the criteria used by the American model: the age category and the multidisciplinary team because they represent the pillars of the most successful healthcare center. In conclusion, the proper management of healthcare centers requires the interference of all existing models while taking advantage of the advantages and limitations of each experience.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.422
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hunan University Natural SciencesSame topicHealth, Medicine and SocietyFrench-language works237,207