Vers une culture de l’offre active de services de santé dans les deux langues officielles, étude de cas d’une pratique de dialogue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Afin d’implanter une culture de l’offre active (OA) des services dans les deux langues officielles, le réseau de santé Horizon au Nouveau-Brunswick a mené des sessions de dialogues auprès de plus de 3 400 employés. Ces dialogues ont permis aux participantes et aux participants d’exprimer leurs opinions sur l’OA, les défis rencontrés et des pistes de solution. Notre projet visait à mieux comprendre la portée des activités de dialogue sur le développement d’une culture de l’OA au sein du réseau de santé Horizon. L’analyse des évaluations réalisées après chacune des sessions, de la documentation interne et des entretiens menés auprès de huit organisatrices et animatrices de ces dialogues, montre que ce type d’exercice recèle un potentiel pour mettre en place une culture de l’OA, tout en permettant de mieux comprendre certains blocages.
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 | 0.040 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".