Evaluating outcomes of therapies offered by occupational therapists in adult mental health
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Attitudes towards the use of outcome measures by professionals working in mental health have been shown to be variable. Occupational therapists appear to have difficulty specifying goals and measuring the outcomes of interventions. AIMS: To measure the outcomes of therapies offered by occupational therapists and to assess concurrent validity of the Van du Toit Model of Creative Ability (VdT MoCA) assessment. METHOD: The Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF), VdT MoCA assessment and Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) were used. Changes in mean scores on the measures were assessed using appropriate tests. Correlations between measures were assessed using Spearman's non-parametric test. RESULTS: Mean post-therapy scores were significantly higher than pre-therapy scores on all three measures. VdT MoCA assessment scores pre- and post-therapy were highly correlated with GAF scores. The COPM outcome scores were uncorrelated with VdT MoCA assessment and GAF scores. CONCLUSIONS: The results offer a promising indication that occupational therapy interventions may increase functioning and thus aid clients' recovery. The VdT MoCA assessment is promising as a measure of improvement in functioning. Further research is needed to confirm these results and to further explore issues around occupational therapists' use of outcome measures.
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 | 0.008 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".