Bibliographic record
Abstract
La communication et l'écoute dans la relation thérapeutique de suivis de maladies chroniques ou liés aux années (d'une durée moyenne de 24 ans) prennent une place prépondérante dans ce travail de réflexion et d'analyse, centré sur treize vignettes cliniques, dont le choix a été guidé par l'apparition surprenante de conflits de valeurs à différents niveaux relationnels. Ces conflits et la recherche de leur origine sont analysés à travers une grille personnelle, inspirée de différentes propositions méthodologiques d'éthiciens européens et canadiens, adaptée aux conditions de la pratique de généraliste de cabinet. De cette réflexion émerge en priorité l'importance de l'attention à la différence, du respect de l'autonomie du patient dans ses choix en articulation avec le temps, la responsabilité du médecin dans sa réponse à la souffrance de l'individu et la coordination au contexte ambiant socio-économique, juridique et au progrès de la médecine.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.074 | 0.017 |
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".