The Occupational Profile of Women with Fibromyalgia Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aims of this study were to assess the functional level of women with fibromyalgia; to investigate the differences in the occupational activities between women with fibromyalgia and healthy women; and to analyse the perceived importance of occupational performance during self-care, productivity and leisure activities. A cross-sectional case control study was performed. Twenty women with fibromyalgia and 20 healthy women completed the Functional Independence Measure (FIM), the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), a Numerical Pain Rating Scale, the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire and the SF-36 health survey. The Chi-square test (χ2), the Student's t test and the Spearman's test were used on the data. The FIM revealed significant differences regarding several activities: personal hygiene, bathing and memory (p < 0.01). The COPM scores did not reveal significant differences between groups (p > 0.10). Women with fibromyalgia had higher disability and reduced quality of life and required greater assistance to perform specific activities of daily living, i.e. hygiene, than healthy women. This highlights the specific occupational therapy needs these women have for performing many basic activities and for improving their quality of life. Limitations of the study include the small sample size, the exclusion of male participants and the possible influence of the women's psychological status on the assessments performed. Findings should be generalized with caution. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".