MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080098612 · doi:10.1177/030802260406701002

Occupational Therapists as Primary Health Promoters: Opportunities and Barriers

2004· article· en· W2080098612 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Angela Scriven, Anita Atwal

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharterOccupational therapyPromotion (chess)Health promotionMedicineMultidisciplinary approachNursingOccupational safety and healthOccupational health nursingMedical educationPublic relationsPolitical sciencePublic healthPhysical therapyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over the last two decades, there has been a growing international interest by some associations of occupational therapy and their respective members in the contribution that occupational therapists can make to the multidisciplinary field of health promotion. More recently, the College of Occupational Therapists in the United Kingdom has recommended that occupational therapists take a more proactive stance in the health promotion arena and has advocated the World Health Organisation's Ottawa Charter principles to inform this professional development. In this paper, a critical assessment is made of the opportunities for and the barriers to the adoption of a primary health promotion role by occupational therapists working in the United Kingdom and how the principles advocated in the charter might reflect a more distinctive occupational therapy approach to the promotion of health. It is argued that a paradigm shift would be required if the profession moved towards a primary health promotion agenda.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.258 · 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.

Study designObservational
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

Citations31
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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