Bibliographic record
Abstract
Communicating this new knowledge through dissemination avenues is vital for its uptake in practice, for informing future research, and to support applications for research funding. Since 1933, when the Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy (CJOT) was first published, over 20 peer-reviewed, discipline-specific occupational therapy journals have been created, broadening our dissemination potential. Social media and networking opportunities can provide us with the capability for sharing and creating occupational therapy knowledge that can be taken up and used by occupational therapy practitioners and used to increase awareness of the importance of occupational engagement and effective occupational enablement within health care, education, social services professions, and consumer groups.
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 | 0.010 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.034 | 0.027 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.094 | 0.087 |
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".