Bibliographic record
Abstract
En tant que psychiatre dans un refuge, j’ai accompagné Claude, un homme en situation d’itinérance. Son rêve de partir vers l’Amérique du Sud à bord de sa van m’a inspiré à développer une écriture nomade en médecine narrative. Cette approche, issue de la rencontre thérapeutique, cherche à dépasser les catégories biomédicales pour dire quelque chose de l’autre dans son unicité et son devenir. Une stratégie possible est de rencontrer le soigné ou la soignée en dehors des lieux cliniques institutionnels, en portant attention à ses relations concrètes. L’écriture nomade en médecine narrative vise aussi à libérer le potentiel créatif de l’écriture elle-même en tant que pratique artistique, en allant au-delà de l’expérience vécue de la maladie ou de l’analyse critique du contexte thérapeutique. Cette démarche pourrait se révéler particulièrement utile en psychiatrie et avec les personnes en situation de marginalité sociale, ouvrant ainsi de nouvelles perspectives de soins.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".