MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408440951 · doi:10.54932/unvn5805

Qu’en est-il des besoins en santé des aînés au Québec ? Portrait détaillé du recours aux services de santé durant la dernière année de vie

2025· report· fr· W4408440951 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
elphine Bosson-Rieutort, Juliette Duc, Alexandra Langford-Avelar, Erin Strumpf

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les personnes de 65 ans et plus représenteront le quart de la population québécoise en 2031, ce qui n’est pas sans soulever des inquiétudes. Durant les dernières années de vie, cette population vieillissante risque de présenter une augmentation de problèmes de santé multiples, nécessitant des soins de plus en plus complexes et coûteux. Le système de santé et de services sociaux québécois devra ajuster son offre de services afin de répondre à ces besoins changeants. Dans une étude CIRANO (Bosson-Rieutort et al., 2024), les auteurs montrent qu’une personne sur six meurt des suites d’une fragilité physique et cognitive, comme la maladie d’Alzheimer parmi les personnes qui avaient 65 ans ou plus au moment de leur décès. Le coût individuel des services utilisés par ces personnes grimpe en flèche dans les derniers mois de vie, surtout à cause des coûts associés à leur hébergement en institution. Considérant la volonté du gouvernement de favoriser les soins à domicile et de s’éloigner de la vision hospitalo-centrée, cette étude représente une importante contribution au débat.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAging, Elder Care, and Social Issues→French-language works237,207→