Assessment of Awareness of Disability Measures among Persons with Acquired Brain Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Limited self-awareness of disabilities can compromise individuals' occupational performance. PURPOSE: The Assessment of Awareness of Disability (AAD) provides occupational therapists with a standardized methodology for measuring clients'self-awareness when performing activities of daily living (ADL). This is the first study that formally examines the stability of the AAD measures. METHODS: The AAD was administered twice to 15 participants with acquired brain injury (ABI) within one or two days. One participant's data were excluded because significant changes in his ADL process abilities were detected. Two criteria were used to examine the stability of the remaining 14 participants' AAD measures: standardized difference Z-scores and a difference of 0.65 logits. FINDINGS: All 14 participants' AAD measures were stable on the basis of theirZ-scores; 13 participants' measures were stable based on the 0.65 logit difference. IMPLICATIONS: Occupational therapists can have confidence that the AAD generates stable measures when administered to adults with ABI.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".