MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155641672 · doi:10.1080/j148v24n04_03

The Relationship Between the Assessment of Motor and Process Skills (AMPS) and the Large Allen Cognitive Level (LACL)Test in Clients with Stroke

2006· article· en· W2155641672 on OpenAlex
Batia S. Marom, Tal Jarus, Naomi Josman

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical & Occupational Therapy In Geriatrics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyTest (biology)CognitionStroke (engine)Process (computing)Physical medicine and rehabilitationCognitive skillGerontologyApplied psychologyMedicineComputer scienceNeuroscienceEngineeringMechanical engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AbstractThis study examined the relationship between two different assessments used in occupational therapy: occupational based assessment (the assessment of motor and process scales–AMPS) and a body function assessment (the large Allen cognitive levels–LACL). Thirty clients performed both assessments at home after their first stroke. Results indicated moderate positive correlation between the LACL and the AMPS, yet there were discrepancies between the two tools in the determination of independence in instrumental activities of daily living (IADL). The gap between the capacity of the person and the actual performance, and the limitations and strengths of each of these assessments is discussed in relation to these contradictions. Further research is recommended with a larger controlled stratified sample. We also suggest examining the predictive value of the motor and process scales of the AMPS and the cognitive level of the LACL for independence in IADL activities. Examining other factors beyond the motor and process functions that might affect independent performance in IADL for stroke survivors is recommended.KEYWORDS: IADLoccupational observation assessmentbody function assessment Additional informationNotes on contributorsNaomi JosmanJennifer R. Johnson was a graduate student in the School of Occupational Therapy, Texas Woman's University, Houston, TX at the time of this study. She is currently employed as an Occupational Therapist at Touro Infirmary in New Orleans, LADebra Stewart is Lecturer, School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University and staff therapist at Erinoak Centre, Missis-sauga, Ontario. She is currently completing a MSc (Design, Measurement and Evaluation) at McMaster University.Ronald L. Mace (deceased, June 29, 1998) was also affiliated with The Center for Universal Design, School of Design, North Carolina University.Lois Rosage and Geraldine Shaw are Occupational Therapist Consultants who provide evaluations for the housing programs at the Philadelphia Corporation for Aging.Debbie Rand is Occupational Therapist, Beit Rivka Geriatric Rehabilitation Hospital, Petach Tikva, Israel. She completed this study in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science degree in Occupational Therapy, School of Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Her mailing address is 50 Heh B'Eyar Street, Apartment 5, Rosh Ha'Ayin, Israel, 48056.Maureen McKenna is a Licensed Physical Therapist and Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist in California. Her Current position is: Assistant Professor of Physical Therapy, Wheeling Jesuit University, 316 Washington Avenue, Wheeling, WV 26003.Heather Lambert was funded in part by a Health Canada NHRDP Fellowship, a REPAR Fellowship, a doctoral bursary from the Fonds de la Recherche en Santé du Quebec, and a Canadian Occupational Therapy Foundation-Royal Canadian Legion Fellowship in Gerontology.Trish Wielandt was supported by a University of Queensland Postgraduate Research Scholarship (UQPRS).Dr. Leigh Tooth was supported by a NHMRC Fellowship (#997032) while some of this research was undertaken.J. D. "Herb" Herbert is Occupational Therapist, Rocky Mountain Menders LLC, 363 Pioneer Road, Lyons, CO 80540. At the time of this study, he was a graduate student, Department of Occupational Therapy, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.218

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.331 · 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