MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2298641468 · doi:10.1177/0308022615612807

Enabling participation of students through school-based occupational therapy services: Towards a broader scope of practice

2015· article· en· W2298641468 on OpenAlexaff
Madeleine Bonnard, Dana Anaby

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational therapyScope (computer science)Perspective (graphical)Scope of practicePsychologyMedical educationPedagogyMedicinePolitical sciencePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Both students with disabilities and their typically-developing peers exhibit alarming participation deficits that involve many occupational areas of their school experience. Enabling participation in school-related occupations as the goal of school-based occupational therapy services invokes practice breadth. However, the documented focus of practice appears narrow, and there is an apparent paucity of evidence to describe how school participation is enabled. This paper discusses the complex concept of participation and how it can be applied in the school setting, while drawing upon occupational therapy elements. Redirecting attention towards participation can expand the scope of school-based occupational therapy to its intended broad perspective.

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)0.021
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0210.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.007
Open science0.0020.021
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.369
GPT teacher head0.566
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations35
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207