Perceived and Valued Roles of Adults with Severe Mental Health Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to convey the findings of two studies related to the perception of past, present and future roles, the value attributed to these roles as well as the role patterns. Both studies were conducted with adults who have schizophrenia and are involved in a rehabilitation or work program. Data were collected from two sources: 1) secondary analysis of a study related to the methodology for validating the French translation (Hachey, Jumoorty, & Mercier, 1995) of the "Role Checklist", (Barris, Oakley, & Kielhofner, 1988) and 2) a research project on the perception of roles and quality of life. Results showed that the dominant roles assumed by participants regardless of time were family member, friend, home maintainer and hobbyist. The most valued roles were those of friend, worker, and family member. The discussion will address the questions asked and elucidate the role patterns. The conclusion underlines the importance, for occupational therapists and health professionals, of including roles in the daily lives of their clients, taking into consideration the ones they value most highly.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".