A call for sustainable practice in occupational therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The ability of the earth to sustain health among humans and in the natural world is under threat from overpopulation, environmental degradation, and climate change. These global threats are anticipated to harm health and human occupation in many direct and indirect ways. Strategies are needed to mitigate the effects of these threats and to build individual and community capacities to foster resilience. PURPOSE: This paper links issues of sustainability with occupational therapy philosophy and discusses how employing a sustainability lens with professional reasoning can help practitioners integrate sustainability into their practice. KEY ISSUES: Human occupation is inseparable from the environments in which people live. Human occupation has caused the current environmental crisis, and targeted human action is required to safeguard future health and well-being. IMPLICATIONS: Occupational therapists have an ethical obligation to use professional reasoning strategies that, taken collectively, can help to build a sustainable and resilient future.
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 | 0.098 | 0.075 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.085 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.027 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.035 |
| Research integrity | 0.036 | 0.031 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.003 |
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".