MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131585808 · doi:10.1177/000841740206900206

Measuring the Impact of Parkinson's Disease: An Occupational Therapy Perspective

2002· review· en· W2131585808 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Paula Gaudet

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreDalhousie University
FundersDalhousie UniversityCanadian Occupational Therapy Foundation
KeywordsOccupational therapyParkinson's diseaseDiseaseMedicineRating scalePerspective (graphical)Physical therapyPsychologyClinical psychologyGerontologyPathologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parkinson's disease is a common neurodegenerative disorder, affecting over 100,000 Canadians. With advances in medical and surgical treatments, clients are living longer and fuller lives. However, as the disease progresses those with Parkinson's continue to face a variety of deficits in their occupational performance. Although this is the domain of occupational therapists, very little is described in the occupational therapy literature related to Parkinson's. This article addresses this void by describing these deficits and current measurement tools that can be used to evaluate the impact on people living with Parkinson's disease. Although several tools are cited, three tools are recommended for an occupational therapy evaluation of individuals with Parkinson's disease: the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure, the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale and the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.262
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.165 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations40
Published2002
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicParkinson's Disease Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207