MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7114799450 · doi:10.7202/1121532ar

Le programme de télésanté de prévention des chutes Marche vers le Futur : développement et retombées d’une communauté de pratique franco-canadienne

2025· article· fr· W7114799450 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMinorités linguistiques et société · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaBruyère
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPromotion (chess)Latin AmericansWestern europe

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le programme de télésanté Marche Vers le Futur (MVF) a eu un impact positif sur le bien-être des personnes âgées francophones et sur leur accès aux services de prévention des chutes au Canada. L’objectif de ce projet était de développer et de mettre en place une communauté de pratique (CdP) facilitant le partenariat et le partage des connaissances entre les animateurs du programme MVF. La création de cette CdP a permis à vingt-deux animateurs de cinq provinces de partager des stratégies de recrutement, de promotion du programme et de sensibilisation quant aux besoins des personnes âgées francophones au pays. Quatre rencontres virtuelles ont permis d’identifier les obstacles à la pérennité de MFV, les facteurs facilitant la mobilisation des connaissances ainsi que les initiatives de formation continue. La CdP a permis de renforcer les réseaux de partenariat entre les chercheurs et les animateurs du programme MVF, ce qui pourrait avoir un impact important sur l’équité en santé chez les personnes âgées francophones vivant en situation minoritaire au Canada.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.368 · 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 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
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMinorités linguistiques et sociétéSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207