Besoins criants, gains modestes : L’acces a des soins de sante mentale en francais en Ontario, 1968–1989
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les gains en matière de soins de santé mentale en français arrivent au compte-goutte entre 1968 et 1986. L’État ontarien agit avec prudence dans ce dossier. Malgré les pressions des individus et de l’Association canadienne-française de l’Ontario, la mise en place de soins de santé mentale en français s’est butée à de nombreux obstacles tels que la pénurie de personnel parlant français, les difficultés à attirer ce personnel et à les inciter à demeurer notamment dans le Nord, les carences du système d’éducation à former des francophones, les hésitations du gouvernement ontarien, mais aussi l’hostilité au fait français. Abstract: Gains by Franco-Ontarians for French-language mental health services were modest between 1968 and 1986. The Ontario government was cautious in how it had managed the mental health care issue in French. Despite pressure from individuals and the Association canadiennefrançaise de l’Ontario, the implementation of mental health services in French encountered several challenges, including a shortage of French-speaking professionals, the difficulties of attracting and retaining medical professionals, especially in Northern Ontario, the shortcomings of the educational system, the reluctance of the Ontario government and the hostility toward Franco-Ontarians.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".