Sharing the world of occupation from Latin America – WFOT Congress, May 2010
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The 15th World Congress of the World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT) welcomed 2134 delegates from all parts of the globe to Santiago, Chile, from 4th to 7th May 2010. The opening ceremony at the Espacio Riesco (Santiago Convention and Exhibition Centre) gave delegates a taste of local culture with the entrance of WFOT executive and councillors, keynote speakers, Team Chile (the organising committee) and delegates. Energy was carried into the sessions with stimulating presentations, posters and discussions. There were 1290 presentations, including 517 oral papers or workshops and 776 posters. A total of 2041 abstracts were considered. Simultaneous translation services were available in Spanish and English. The four days of congress and WFOT activities were the visible and very successful outcomes of a long process for Team Chile. They were led by Alejandro Guarjardo, President; Paola Mendez, Vice President; Enrique Henry, International Co-President; and Marilyn Patterson, International Co-President and Executive Director, WFOT. Team Chile faced extraordinary hardships as a consequence of the earthquake in Chile in February 2010. Team Chile commends the messages of support from colleagues and occupational therapy organisations around the world. Congress themes included: Human rights and occupational therapy Occupational therapy practice development Culture and occupation Occupational practice: Past and future trends Quality and management Occupational therapy education: The profession and discipline Occupation, daily life, subjectivity and occupational therapy. Themes were reflected by keynote speakers and provided threads for concurrent sessions. The first keynote speaker Professor Manfred Max-Neef, from the Universidad Austral de Chile, is described as one of ‘the top hundred visionaries of the 20th Century’ (WFOT, 2010). Professor Mary Law (Canada), in her keynote address titled Learning by doing: Creating knowledge for occupational therapy, laid out an approach on how we examine and use current knowledge. Professor Law (2010) stated that ‘We have a responsibility to build a knowledge creation process consistent with occupational therapy values’. Assistant Professor Sandra Galheigo (2010) from Brazil provided a vivid perspective on occupational therapy in Latin America. She supports the view that social meaning, social justice and political action are essential features of occupational therapy practice (Galheigo, 2010). Galheigo iterated the importance of holding the congress for the first time in a Latin American country. She continued that WFOT (2010)‘invites a readdressing of social issues and cultural contexts. The debate on human rights, despite being universal, takes on a different meaning when it occurs in a place where human rights were sorely disregarded in past history’. The WFOT Plenary Session provided delegates with an insight into the planning cycles of the council across the world. The dedication of honorary workers is clearly demonstrated. Meetings included: Occupational Therapy journal editors’ meeting International launch of the research centre for Occupational and Mental Health Occupational therapy without borders Students networking and social sessions and a virtual forum Forum to facilitate international fieldwork education The disability forum fringe meeting.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,024 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».