Does the Comprehensive ICF Core Set for Rheumatoid Arthritis Capture Occupational Therapy Practice? A Content-Validity Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The ICF Core Sets for rheumatoid arthritis (RA) constitute an application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). PURPOSE: To explore whether the ICF Core Sets for RA include the areas of functioning and environmental factors that are typically treated by occupational therapists in their clinical everyday practice with clients with RA. METHODS: In a three-round survey occupational therapists were asked about their intervention goals when treating clients with RA. The identified goals were grouped into goal classes that were then linked to the ICF. RESULTS: 41 occupational therapists in nine countries named 533 intervention goals that were grouped into 48 goal classes and then linked to ICF categories of all ICF components. The goal classes self-confidence, relaxation and psycho-social well-being are not represented in the Comprehensive ICF Core Set for RA. CONCLUSION: The validity of the ICF Core Set for RA from the perspective of occupational therapists was largely confirmed.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".