MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404919847 · doi:10.7202/1114560ar

Comprendre les expériences de violences et de recours d’aide des femmes Mi’gmaq : résultats qualitatifs et appliqués d’une étude partenariale dans la communauté de Listuguj [synthèse en français]

2024· article· fr· W4404919847 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marie‐Catherine Gagnon‐Dufresne, Danielle Pelland, Sheila Swasson, Mitchell Isaac, Isabelle Paillé, Mélisande Dorion-Laurendeau, Marie‐Marthe Cousineau

Bibliographic record

VenueAlterstice Revue internationale de la recherche interculturelle · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsRegroupement des Maisons pour Femmes Victimes de Violence ConjugaleUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisFédération des Maisons D'Hébergement pour FemmesUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Il s’agit de la synthèse en français de l’article "Understanding the violence and help-seeking experiences of Mi’gmaq women: Qualitative and applied results from a partnered study in the community of Listuguj" paru dans le même numéro d’Alterstice. Émergeant d’une étude partenariale au sein de la communauté Mi’gmaq de Listuguj, cet article a été rédigé en anglais par souci d’inclusion des partenaires dans le processus d’écriture et de diffusion auprès de la communauté. L’objectif était de comprendre les expériences de violences et de recours d’aide des femmes Mi’gmaq afin de développer des solutions pour améliorer les services offerts dans la communauté. Cette étude partenariale est importante, non seulement car elle réaffirme l’interrelation entre les violences interpersonnelles et les violences structurelles dans la vie des femmes autochtones, mais aussi car ses résultats appliqués peuvent être utilisés par la communauté de Listuguj pour mieux répondre aux besoins des survivantes de violences.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.271
GPT teacher head0.503
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlterstice Revue internationale de la recherche interculturelleSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207