Occupational therapy interventions in the treatment of people with severe mental illness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Life expectancy of people with severe mental illness is considerably shortened and their risk for cardiovascular and metabolic disorders is increased. They spend more time in solitary and less time in structured activities than the general population.Engagement in healthy patterns of activity, including active, meaningful participation in the community can, therefore, be critical to recovery from severe mental illness. Occupational therapy is a profession that focuses on time use, activity patterns and occupational engagement, and the links to health and well-being. In this study, we review research evidence regarding approaches to occupational engagement, including behavioural activation, time use, and activity promotion. We also will review studies that specifically evaluate the impact of occupational therapy interventions. RECENT FINDINGS: There is a growing body of evidence regarding the value of interventions addressing occupational engagement of individuals with severe mental illness, including a range of activation strategies and approaches. There is a need, however, for documentation of theoretically informed approaches that are supported by fidelity measures to ensure standardization. SUMMARY: Larger-scale studies are needed, including consistent outcome measures to document engagement and changes in activity patterns as well as health-related outcomes. High-quality randomized clinical trials are important to establish effectiveness. As occupational therapy interventions are complex and embedded within a range of multidisciplinary approaches, new models of pragmatic trials within the naturalistic context of psychiatric rehabilitation are also 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".