MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767165231 · doi:10.1177/1539449217736059

The Cognitive Orientation to Daily Occupational Performance Approach and Transfer: A Scoping Review

2017· review· en· W2767165231 on OpenAlexafffund
Adina Houldin, Sara McEwen, Mackenzie W. Howell, Helene J. Polatajko

Bibliographic record

VenueOTJR Occupational Therapy Journal of Research · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsSt. John's Rehab HospitalSunnybrook Health Science CentreSunnybrook HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersSunnybrook Research Institute
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Transfer of learningCognitionOrientation (vector space)Transfer of trainingIntervention (counseling)Transfer (computing)Cognitive skillPsychologyEveryday lifeWork (physics)Computer scienceCognitive psychologyDevelopmental psychologyArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transferring learning from therapy to everyday life skills is a necessary step for successful therapy outcomes, yet rarely addressed and achieved. However, a cognitive approach to skill acquisition, and the Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO-OP), explicitly identifies transfer as an objective and incorporates elements into the intervention to support transfer. A scoping review was undertaken to explore the nature and extent of the research regarding CO-OP and transfer. An online search of 10 databases was conducted to identify and examine research studies reporting on CO-OP and transfer. The search yielded 25 documents that addressed CO-OP and transfer. The studies used a variety of approaches to evaluate transfer; all reported transfer on at least one and, in many cases, multiple transfer outcome variables. The CO-OP literature addresses transfer across a variety of populations and settings using a variety of approaches. Further work is required to establish a common approach to examining transfer in the CO-OP literature and the literature in general.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.400
GPT teacher head0.554
Teacher spread0.154 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOTJR Occupational Therapy Journal of ResearchSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207