MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054559433 · doi:10.12968/bjtr.2003.10.4.13554

Home safety assessment and intervention practice

2003· article· en· W2054559433 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rosemary Oliver, Teresa Chiu, Linda Marshall, Pam Goldsilver

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSAFERIntervention (counseling)Psychological interventionMedicineMedical educationTask (project management)RehabilitationFunction (biology)PsychologyNursingApplied psychologyPhysical therapyEngineeringComputer scienceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article will describe how occupational therapists in Toronto, Canada, use the Safety Assessment of Function and the Environment for Rehabilitation (SAFER) tool and the SAFER tool manual to conduct home safety assessments and interventions. Interview, observation and task performance are used by therapists to complete the 97-item SAFER tool, which includes intervention strategies such as client and caregiver education. Further developments of the SAFER tool will be briefly described. Key words: occupational therapy, community, environmental safety, assessment, treatment, intervention

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)0.006
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.424 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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