MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2764886314 · doi:10.5014/ajot.56.6.640

Participation in the Occupations of Everyday Life

2002· article· en· W2764886314 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationOccupational therapyEveryday lifeAffect (linguistics)PsychologyPosition (finance)GerontologyMedicineBusinessPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Participation or involvement in everyday occupations is vital for all humans. As described by the World Health Organization, participation has a positive influence on health and well-being. The presence of disability has been found to lead to participation that is less diverse, is located more in the home, involves fewer social relationships, and includes less active recreation. Occupational therapy is in a unique position to contribute to the development and fulfillment of participation for persons with and without disabilities. This article describes the nature and outcomes of participation. Characteristics to define and measure meaningful participation are outlined. Information about time use will help to develop an understanding of patterns of participation across locations, gender, culture, and the life span. Factors that affect participation within the environment, family, and persons are summarized. Occupational therapy research is needed to examine the complex relationship among person, environment, and participation in occupations. In practice and education, knowledge about participation can enhance the client-centered and evidence-based nature of occupational therapy services.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.336
GPT teacher head0.545
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it