Survey of current pre-discharge home visiting practices of occupational therapists
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Discharge planning frequently involves occupational therapy pre-discharge home visiting as one component of intervention. Pre-discharge home visits aim to maximise a person's functional performance within the context of their home and community environment, bridging the transition between hospital and home. The aim of this study was to describe the pre-discharge home visiting practices of occupational therapy departments. METHODS: This descriptive study used a postal survey which was sent to occupational therapists in 215 public and privately funded hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. The survey enquired about the number of pre-discharge home visits completed per month, who went on visits and time spent on visits. Descriptive statistics were used in analyses. RESULTS: Surveys were returned by occupational therapists from 53 departments, representing a response rate of 25%. Respondents estimated that they conducted approximately 13 pre-discharge home visits per month (range: 1-60). Visits were estimated to take an average of 1 hour and 20 minutes (excluding travel time). Approximately one-quarter of respondents felt that there was pressure to reduce the number of pre-discharge home visits conducted. Using their local hospital records, nine hospital departments estimated that the number of home visits completed per month had reduced by 50% compared with the number of home visits five years previously. DISCUSSION: Findings suggest a wide variation in current pre-discharge home visiting practice. There is a need for well-designed clinical trials that investigate the effectiveness of these costly and time-consuming visits on functional performance.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 it