Struggling for Occupational Satisfaction: Older People in Care Homes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the United Kingdom, a wide range of health care reforms has been introduced to enhance the wellbeing of older people. These reforms should ensure that both the public and the private sectors deliver best practice to older people. The role of the occupational therapist with older people is well established in a variety of health and social care settings but there is a noticeable absence of input in care homes, despite evidence that has demonstrated the importance of occupations for wellbeing. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was used in a research study to determine the types of occupation that seven older people perceived as important, their perceptions of their performance and their perceived level of satisfaction. It was found that these older people most valued leisure and self-care occupations, although occupations related to productivity were also cited. A perceived high performance rating often transferred to a high satisfaction rating and a perceived low performance rating to a low satisfaction rating. The challenge for occupational therapists is to implement occupation-based therapy that meets all the needs of older people. Furthermore, there is a requirement to develop the evidence base and to look at strategies to promote occupation in order to ensure occupational satisfaction for all.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".