Canadian and Japanese associations of occupational therapists: trends in their professional activities and education during the period 1982-2001
Bibliographic record
Abstract
日本とカナダにおける作業療法士の専門職としての動向を,2国の作業療法協会誌に掲載されたの職域・実践や教育の動向に関する論文,キーワードから調査した.その結果,1)日本の作業療法士は欧米の影響を強く受けてきており,多くの作業療法士は医学モデルから現状の実践に適した枠組みに移るべき時が来たのではないかと考え始めている.2)カナダでは作業療法士は社会的変化に対応して既に実践モデルを変化させている.3)日本では保健・介護システム変革に伴い,作業療法士数は急増し,新しいシステムにあわせて従来の医学モデルを発展させようとしている.以上,これらのことからも,医療保健領域におけるパラダイム変化が進む中,今後は両国の文化背景の違いを理解しつつ新しい知識を協同して積み上げていくことが大切であろう
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".