Bibliographic record
Abstract
International Classification of Functioning, Disability and HealthThe International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) was adopted by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2001 as a member of its family of classification systems, which includes the common International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes.The ICF replaces the earlier ICIDH model (International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps), which was the first attempt by WHO to develop a standard language for communication about functional outcomes associated with a variety of conditions.The new ICF model places a greater emphasis on contextual factors, both environmental and personal factors.The ICF also focuses on "components of health" as opposed to "consequences of disease" to a greater extent than its precursor model.Over the past five years, occupational and physical therapy professionals have begun to incorporate the ICF into their respective practice frameworks.For those therapists still unfamiliar with the ICF model, it may be summarized as a matrix with a dichotomous foundation of functioning versus disability.Integrity of body structures and functions is considered as well as the individual's ability to perform activities and Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, Vol.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.119 | 0.042 |
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".