MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6888491285 · doi:10.20381/ruor-26934

Les réalités des proches aidant(e)s et l’impact de la pandémie sur leur expérience

2021· other· fr· W6888491285 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2021
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPopulationContext (archaeology)Ile de franceResearch methodology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le contexte social canadien particularisé par le vieillissement de sa population a une incidence sur l’interpellation des proches aidant(e)s. À ce propos, la pandémie de COVID-19 a également entraîné de nombreux changements qui ont eu un impact sur ces derniers. L'analyse de textes scientifiques ainsi que des entrevues effectuées auprès de trois aidantes, nous ont permis d'identifier certaines de ces répercussions. Les résultats révèlent que la prestation de soins a de nombreuses conséquences sur les femmes, qui sont beaucoup plus susceptibles d'assumer les rôles, les responsabilités et les tâches liés à la prise en charge. À titre d’exemple, les participantes ont signalé une détérioration de leur santé mentale et un déclin de leur fonctionnement physique. Cela dit, dans ce mémoire, certains concepts féministes ont été mobilisés afin d’analyser les résultats de cette recherche. Nous discutons également des expériences vécues par nos participantes, démontrant ainsi que la pandémie a eu comme effet d’alourdir et d’atténuer certaines des tâches effectuées par celles-ci. Mots clés : care, femmes, pandémie, proche aidant(e)s, réalités vécues.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)French-language works237,207