MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7029592069

Le régime d'examen des plaintes du réseau de la santé et des services sociaux : examen d'un régime à parfaire

2010· other· fr· W7029592069 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke) · 2010
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic, financial, and policy analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComplaintHealth servicesLegislatorResearch methodology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé: Cet essai se veut une réflexion sur le régime d'examen des plaintes du réseau de la santé et des services sociaux et plus précisément, sur les changements y ayant été apportés suite à l'entrée en vigueur des dispositions du Projet de loi 83 au cours de l'année 2006. Un bref survol y est donc fait des rôles ayant été confiés par le législateur québécois à chacun des acteurs impliqués dans la procédure de traitement des plaintes. Sont ensuite analysées les différentes améliorations apportées par la réforme. Enfin, sont abordées les difficultés persistantes auxquelles se bute le régime d 'examen des plaintes de même que différentes pistes de solution qui pourraient permettre de les résoudre.||Abstract: This essay is a reflection on the complaint examination procedure of the health and social services network and more precisely on the repercussions of bill 83 that came into force in 2006 . An overview of the tasks that have been assigned by Quebec's legislator to every participant in the complaint examination procedure is followed by an analysis of the reform's improvements . The remaining difficulties related to the complaint examination procedure are then examined and possible solutions are proposed to overcome these difficulties.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke)Same topicEconomic, financial, and policy analysisFrench-language works237,207