MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7126203071 · doi:10.7202/1122286ar

Les risques psychosociaux dans le secteur communautaire : modèle de l’inertie systémique de la détresse psychologique

2025· article· fr· W7126203071 on OpenAlexaff
Ericka Chanel Faucher, Julie Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueHumain et Organisation · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSyndemicResearch methodologyPublic policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude explore les mécanismes par lesquels les exigences du travail et les contraintes structurelles influencent la détresse psychologique des intervenantes d’organismes communautaires. Basée sur des entretiens semi-dirigés réalisés auprès de 12 intervenantes, notre analyse révèle un processus bidimensionnel où les exigences (quantitatives, qualitatives et émotionnelles) génèrent des tensions psychologiques et de la fatigue. Parallèlement, l’inertie systémique, conceptualisée comme l’insuffisance des contributions des bénéficiaires et partenaires externes, constitue une contrainte structurelle qui engendre un sentiment d’impuissance. Cette impuissance, associée à la frustration, à la colère et à la tristesse, s’inscrit dans une boucle délétère où la réitération des tâches amplifie l’exposition aux exigences du travail. Cette recherche enrichit les modèles théoriques existants en révélant des mécanismes spécifiques aux professions d’aide.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumain et OrganisationSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207