MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414474554 · doi:10.4000/14qk4

Des apprentissages de la crise sanitaire COVID-19 à la professionnalisation

2025· article· fr· W4414474554 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maëva Leulier-Blanchard, Sandrine Caroly, Vincent Bonneterre

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santé · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService (business)Social activismPoison control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les agents de service mortuaire, invisibilisés et inscrits dans un système où la mort est sécularisée, ont été aux premières loges de la gestion des vagues de décès liés à la crise sanitaire COVID-19. Ces professionnels ont vu leurs contraintes être multipliées, impactant la continuité de l’activité et la santé des agents. Cette recherche-intervention a pour objectif d’identifier les apprentissages faits durant la crise. Grâce aux méthodes d’analyse de l’activité et au retour d’expérience, nous avons étudié les situations de crise au regard de l’activité des agents de service mortuaire d’un Centre hospitalier universitaire (CHU) en France en visant une approche développementale de l’ergonomie. L’analyse diachronique des données met en avant des transformations profondes dans l’activité. Pour y faire face, les régulations, construites par et pour le collectif de travail et avec les collectifs transverses (soignants, entreprises privées) ont permis l’élaboration d’apprentissages organisationnels qui dépassent les situations de crise liées à la COVID-19.

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)0.032
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0320.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0120.016
Scholarly communication0.0160.009
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.440 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives interdisciplinaires sur le travail et la santéSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207