Community-Based Occupational Therapy Services for Children: A Quebec Survey on Service Delivery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community-based occupational therapy (OT) services are intended to promote social integration and minimize disability. The objective of this study was to describe community-based OT services for children in the province of Quebec, Canada. Specific aims included (a) to determine the proportion of Centres Locaux de Services Communautaires (CLSCs) that provide OT services to children, (b) to describe the nature of the services offered, and (c) to identify factors that are associated with the availability of these services. Surveys were sent to all CLSCs where at least one OT was employed. The response rate was 80%. Only 12% of CLSCs offered OT services to children on a regular basis (> or = 1 day/week). Home adaptations were the most frequent service offered, whereas health promotion was rarely addressed. Perceived obstacles to servicing children included prioritization of services to the elderly, limited funding, and shortage of OTs. CLSCs in rural areas and those with a psychologist had significantly more dedicated OT time spent for services to children. The findings suggest that community-based OT services for children in Quebec are poorly developed, which may negatively impact upon timely access to specialized rehabilitation services and may increase activity limitations and family burden.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".