Première ligne en protection de l’enfance au Québec : réformes successives de la santé et des services sociaux, risques psychosociaux au travail et difficultés émotionnelles des intervenantes sociales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adoptant un cadre d’analyse combinant les perspectives psychologiques (risques psychosociaux au travail) et sociologiques (souffrance au travail), cet article présente les facteurs organisationnels (N=22) en cause dans les difficultés émotionnelles des intervenants sociaux. L’étude qualitative, menée auprès de 43 intervenants sociaux oeuvrant dans les services publics de la première ligne auprès des enfants et des familles vulnérabilisés au Québec (Centre local de services communautaires (CLSC), pédopsychiatrie et les centres de réadaptation) montre l’influence des réformes de la santé et des services sociaux sur les conditions de pratique. Ces facteurs organisationnels participent à la détérioration de la santé des travailleurs, l’affaiblissement des collectifs de travail et la détérioration du filet de protection social des enfants et des familles vulnérabilisés du Québec. Bien plus qu’une responsabilité individuelle, l’article met en lumière la responsabilité collective des institutions face aux difficultés émotionnelles des intervenants sociaux.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".