MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018558009 · doi:10.1177/030802260006300703

Client-Centred Practice: Is it Compatible with Early Discharge Hospital-at-Home Policies?

2000· article· en· W2018558009 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda Lane

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNursingHealth careGovernment (linguistics)MedicineAcute careHospital dischargeRehabilitationBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current Government initiatives promote the provision of health care in the community rather than in medical institutions. Over the last decade there has been a growth in the number of early discharge hospital-at-home initiatives which provide a level of nursing and rehabilitation care in the home that previously would have been provided in an acute hospital. Simultaneously, there has been a move away from medical to client-centred models of health care delivery. These new client-centred models of health care emphasise collaboration between client and professional and encourage users of health care services to take greater control over and responsibility for their health care. Some occupational therapists may question whether the principles of client-centred care are compatible with the policy of discharging patients early from hospital while they remain in need of health care. This paper briefly reviews some of the principles of the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance; discusses some of the barriers to providing client-centred services in the early discharge hospital-at-home setting; and reflects upon whether the principles of client-centredness are consistent with early discharge from hospital policies.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.325 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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