MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7009865865

Évaluation critique du régime juridique québécois en matière de consentement aux soins pour le majeur inapte

2005· dissertation· fr· W7009865865 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2005
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, Medicine and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfidentialityPower (physics)Context (archaeology)Government (linguistics)Work (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le regime juridique instaure par le legislateur quebecois en matiere de consentement aux soins pour le majeur inapte merite d'etre revise. La determination de cette inaptitude produit des effets importants. Le constat d'inaptitude prive la personne majeure de son droit de prendre une decision a l'egard de sa sante, une des spheres les plus personnelles et privees de sa vie. Cette these utilise une approche transdisciplinaire, puisant a la fois dans le droit et la bioethique, pour evaluer de facon critique: l'encadrement de la determination de cette inaptitude, la determination juridique de cette inaptitude et les dispositions pertinentes du Code civil du Quebec qui s'appliquent en matiere de consentement aux soins lorsque cette inaptitude est constatee par le medecin. L'auteur conclut que l'objectif vise par le legislateur quebecois, le respect de la personne, n'est que partiellement atteint.

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)0.103
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.230
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.219
Threshold uncertainty score0.661

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1030.230
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0130.016
Scholarly communication0.0150.006
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0070.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicHealth, Medicine and Society→French-language works237,207→