Becoming an occupational therapist: Perceived influence of international fieldwork placements on clinical practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many occupational therapy programs have augmented curricula to provide students with opportunities to engage in international fieldwork placements (IFPs). However, limited research exists exploring the perceived influence that IFPs may have on future occupational therapy roles and characteristics. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to explore how Canadian occupational therapists who participated in IFPs as students perceive the influence of their IFP experience on their subsequent practice. METHOD: Semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 occupational therapists who participated in IFPs as occupational therapy students. The interview guide was developed based on the Profile of Occupational Therapy Practice in Canada and relevant literature. A directed content analysis was used in conjunction with the DEPICT model of data analysis to guide the analysis process and summarize the results. FINDINGS: Participants described how IFPs nurtured the development of six skills, or active ingredients, which supported the development of competence in occupational therapy roles. IFPs were also perceived as providing a competitive edge. IMPLICATIONS: This study suggests that IFPs shape the development of competence in key practice skills and occupational therapy roles.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".