MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7027463689

De son élaboration à sa mise en œuvre : les doutes qu’engendre le régime québécois des directives médicales anticipées

2017· other· fr· W7027463689 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke) · 2017
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEnvironmental Science and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersonal autonomyMoment (physics)Patient rights
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À une époque où la reconnaissance de l’inviolabilité de la personne ainsi que le respect de l’autodétermination sont au cœur des préoccupations de la population, La Loi concernant les soins de fin de vie est venue consacrée en 2015 deux grandes nouveautés en droit québécois. Alors que l’aide médicale à mourir, soit la première section de la Loi, a bénéficié d’une attention sans précédent, le régime des directives médicales anticipées (DMA), constituant la deuxième partie de la Loi, s’est fondu dans le décor. Premier régime à encadrer officiellement les volontés de fin de vie au Québec, il est pourtant pertinent de s’y attarder. Cet essai se veut donc un survol des DMA et des limites qui sont inhérentes à ce nouveau régime, tant au moment où ces directives sont rédigées qu’au moment où elles sont appliquées.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.195 · 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