MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966354929 · doi:10.1177/000841740206900406

La signification des activités quotidiennes chez les personnes souffrant de troubles mentaux graves

2002· article· fr· W1966354929 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ginette Aubin, Raymonde Hachey, Céline Mercier

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Saint-Luc
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPleasurePsychologyActivities of daily livingCompetence (human resources)AffectionMeaning (existential)Social psychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapist

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Severe mental disorders affect the daily activities and lifestyles of people suffering from these problems. A descriptive study was conducted in order to determine the meaning that people with severe mental disorders give to their daily activities. In this study, the meaning of the activities was defined based on Kielhofner's Human Occupation Model, using three indicators: sense of competence, importance and pleasure. These indicators were measured for each daily activity through a semi-structured interview of 45 people suffering from severe mental disorders, using the Occupational Questionnaire. In general, the activities included in the categories of hygiene and self-care, meals and sleep, scored the highest average for each indicator, i.e. sense of competence, importance and pleasure. Work, however, stands out in terms of the importance it is given as an activity, while social activities are valued through their association with pleasure. An analysis of the results underlines the importance that occupational therapists have an improved understanding of the meaning that people suffering from mental disorders give to their daily activities in order to support their efforts in developing a more positive perception of the way they occupy their time.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.395
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.069 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207