MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989212392 · doi:10.1177/0308022614563942

Focus on participation for children and youth with disabilities: Supporting therapy practice through a guided knowledge translation process

2015· article· en· W1989212392 on OpenAlexaff
Dana Anaby, Nicol Korner‐Bitensky, Mary Law, Isabelle Cormier

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMAB-Mackay Rehabilitation CentreMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisMandateIntervention (counseling)Occupational therapyKnowledge translationFocus groupEmpowermentPsychologyMedical educationQualitative researchMedicineNursingKnowledge managementSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Participation in community leisure occupations of children with disabilities is important, yet poorly integrated into practice. This knowledge translation strategy tested an intervention to increase clinicians' awareness and to bring about change in practice toward a focus on participation. Method During this qualitative study, 14 clinicians participated in six learning sessions facilitated by a knowledge broker. Three months post-intervention, clinicians were individually interviewed, by drawing on the Professional Evaluation and Reflection on Change Tool, to evaluate potential change in practice. Two researchers independently performed thematic data analysis. Results Impact on practice emerged in both the personal and professional levels (for example, empowerment, validation of clinical wisdom, change in thinking and behavior). Clinicians suggested strategies for integrating participation in their day-to-day practice, illustrating a substantial intention for change, while describing barriers and facilitators for implementation (for example, organizational mandate). Two additional themes described the overall experience of the intervention: motivation to learn (for example, desire to link research to practice) and elements of the learning environment (for example, meeting informational needs). Conclusion This strategy was effective in redirecting clinicians' focus toward the notion of participation and establishing readiness for change. This shift can potentially facilitate new programs in occupational therapy that are participation-based and community-focused.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.454
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.452
GPT teacher head0.561
Teacher spread0.109 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations44
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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