Content Validation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Set for Stroke: The Perspective of Occupational Therapists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The "ICF Core Set for stroke" is an application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and represents the typical spectrum of problems in the functioning of patients with stroke. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to validate this ICF Core Set from the perspective of occupational therapists. METHODS: In a three-round electronic mail survey using the Delphi technique, occupational therapists experienced in stroke treatment were asked about patients'problems, patients' resources, and aspects of environment they take care of. Two health professionals linked responses to the ICF. FINDINGS: Sixty-nine occupational therapists in 21 countries named 1,747 concepts that occupational therapists treat in patients with stroke. These concepts were linked to 347 different ICF categories. Twenty-three concepts were linked to the ICF component Personal Factors. CONCLUSION: The content validity of the "ICF Core Set for stroke" was largely supported by occupational therapists.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".