Prévalence du jeu pathologique dans les organismes communautaires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au Québec, la dernière étude de prévalence auprès de la population générale observe un taux de 2,1% de joueurs pathologiques (Ladouceur, Jacques, Ferland & Giroux,1997). Les études auprès des populations particulières (Castellani et al., 1996; Othsuka et al., 1997) rapportent des taux de prévalence plus élevés que dans la population générale. La présente étude a pour but d’estimer la prévalence du jeu pathologique auprès d’un échantillon de personnes ayant recours aux organismes communautaires offrant de l’assistance financière, matérielle ou de l’hébergement. Les participants sont pour la majorité ni aux études et ni à l’emploi. Les résultats indiquent que 17,2% des personnes sont joueurs pathologiques dont 80% d’hommes et 20% de femmes. Cette recherche permet de joindre des joueurs pathologiques exclus des dernières études de prévalence menées par téléphone. À l’intérieur de la discussion, les particularités de cette population sont mises en relation avec les problèmes de jeu.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".