MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112357403 · doi:10.1177/000841740507200506

Targeted Applications of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure

2005· article· en· W2112357403 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster UniversityDalhousie UniversityKingston Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMeasure (data warehouse)Occupational therapyMedicinePsychologyComputer sciencePhysical therapyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) is an outcome measure designed to assess performance and satisfaction with occupation. It was developed to coincide with the occupation-focused, client-centred Canadian Model of Occupational Performance. PURPOSE: The COPM has been a feature of the occupational therapy landscape for approximately 15 years and has pervaded the consciousness of occupational therapists around the world. In this paper, we examine issues associated with application of the COPM in targeted clinical and non-clinical situations. RESULTS: The paper suggests considerations required to ensure that the highest quality of information is derived from the COPM in all situations. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Although the paper emphasizes the centrality of the client-centred approach, it also demonstrates the flexibility and adaptability of the COPM to different situations, clients, settings and purposes.

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 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)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.515
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.259 · 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