Using the WHO-ICF with Talking Mats to Enable Adults with Long-term Communication Difficulties to Participate in Goal Setting
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The World Health Organization International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (WHO-ICF) provides a framework that helps rehabilitation staff to take a holistic view of the patient. However, it is used predominantly by professionals rather than by active participation on behalf of the person with the disability. In addition, the language used within the framework can be difficult for patients to understand. In order to address these issues the Activities and Participation section of the ICF has been adapted by using graphic symbols. It has been used in conjunction with Talking Mats(™ 1 ), a low-tech communication framework, to help adults with long-term conditions participate in goal setting. This paper describes how this was done and provides examples from clinical practice. The paper discusses how this combined framework can empower people with communication difficulties and long-term conditions to become active participants in the rehabilitation process by identifying their own goals, indicating changing priorities and tracking their progress.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it