Sharing the world of occupation from Latin America – WFOT Congress, May 2010
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 15th World Congress of the World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT) welcomed 2134 delegates from all parts of the globe to Santiago, Chile, from 4th to 7th May 2010. The opening ceremony at the Espacio Riesco (Santiago Convention and Exhibition Centre) gave delegates a taste of local culture with the entrance of WFOT executive and councillors, keynote speakers, Team Chile (the organising committee) and delegates. Energy was carried into the sessions with stimulating presentations, posters and discussions. There were 1290 presentations, including 517 oral papers or workshops and 776 posters. A total of 2041 abstracts were considered. Simultaneous translation services were available in Spanish and English. The four days of congress and WFOT activities were the visible and very successful outcomes of a long process for Team Chile. They were led by Alejandro Guarjardo, President; Paola Mendez, Vice President; Enrique Henry, International Co-President; and Marilyn Patterson, International Co-President and Executive Director, WFOT. Team Chile faced extraordinary hardships as a consequence of the earthquake in Chile in February 2010. Team Chile commends the messages of support from colleagues and occupational therapy organisations around the world. Congress themes included: Human rights and occupational therapy Occupational therapy practice development Culture and occupation Occupational practice: Past and future trends Quality and management Occupational therapy education: The profession and discipline Occupation, daily life, subjectivity and occupational therapy. Themes were reflected by keynote speakers and provided threads for concurrent sessions. The first keynote speaker Professor Manfred Max-Neef, from the Universidad Austral de Chile, is described as one of ‘the top hundred visionaries of the 20th Century’ (WFOT, 2010). Professor Mary Law (Canada), in her keynote address titled Learning by doing: Creating knowledge for occupational therapy, laid out an approach on how we examine and use current knowledge. Professor Law (2010) stated that ‘We have a responsibility to build a knowledge creation process consistent with occupational therapy values’. Assistant Professor Sandra Galheigo (2010) from Brazil provided a vivid perspective on occupational therapy in Latin America. She supports the view that social meaning, social justice and political action are essential features of occupational therapy practice (Galheigo, 2010). Galheigo iterated the importance of holding the congress for the first time in a Latin American country. She continued that WFOT (2010)‘invites a readdressing of social issues and cultural contexts. The debate on human rights, despite being universal, takes on a different meaning when it occurs in a place where human rights were sorely disregarded in past history’. The WFOT Plenary Session provided delegates with an insight into the planning cycles of the council across the world. The dedication of honorary workers is clearly demonstrated. Meetings included: Occupational Therapy journal editors’ meeting International launch of the research centre for Occupational and Mental Health Occupational therapy without borders Students networking and social sessions and a virtual forum Forum to facilitate international fieldwork education The disability forum fringe meeting.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.045 | 0.008 |
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".