The entry-level occupational therapy clinical doctorate: The next education wave of change in Canada?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Currently, Canada and the United States are the only two countries that mandate entry to the occupational therapy profession at the master's level. There was a recommendation considered by the American Occupational Therapy Association that by 2025 all education programs would move to the clinical doctorate level. In August 2015, the Accreditation Council for Occupational Therapy Education made the formal decision that for now, the entry-level qualification for occupational therapists in the United States will remain at both the master's and clinical doctorate levels. PURPOSE: This article presents an overview of the types of doctorates available, the pros and cons of moving to the clinical doctorate, and some potential questions that will need to be considered. KEY ISSUES: Is the next step in the educational progression of occupational therapy in Canada the entry-level clinical doctorate? What are the potential implications for the profession, our clients, and funders? IMPLICATIONS: Further discourse and investigation of this issue is needed.
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 | 0.012 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".