MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7147156364 · doi:10.7202/1123949ar

Fratrie adulte et déficience intellectuelle au Québec : rôles, relations et besoins de soutien

2025· article· fr· W7147156364 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Myriam Rousseau, Suzie McKinnon, Isabelle Simonato

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelle · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicFamily and Disability Support Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-RivièresCentre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Mauricie-et-du-Centre-du-QuébecUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial environmentCultural environmentSocial policy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Avec le vieillissement des parents, le soutien des personnes présentant une déficience intellectuelle (DI) est souvent transféré à leur fratrie, entraînant divers défis. Cette étude explore la réalité des frères et soeurs adultes de personnes présentant une DI au Québec, documentant leur relation et identifiant leurs besoins de soutien. Une approche mixte a été employée auprès de 28 participants. Les répondants déclarent un fort attachement et des contacts réguliers. Ils perçoivent des bénéfices personnels et notent une influence sur leurs décisions de vie. Leur implication est élevée et diversifiée. La majorité se dit prête à soutenir leur fratrie à l’avenir. Leurs besoins prioritaires sont l’information, le soutien par un intervenant ou un site web, et le partage d’expériences avec des pairs.

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)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 venueRevue francophone de la déficience intellectuelleSame topicFamily and Disability Support ResearchFrench-language works237,207