MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923869995 · doi:10.1155/2019/9030897

Experience of Occupations among People Living with a Personality Disorder

2019· article· en· W2923869995 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

VenueOccupational Therapy International · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité LavalInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyThematic analysisPersonalityMental healthOccupational therapyPsychological interventionNarrativePersonality disordersCoping (psychology)Clinical psychologyQualitative researchSocial psychologyPsychotherapistPsychiatrySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Personality disorders are common mental health disorders, with an estimated lifetime prevalence of 4 to 15%. People living with personality disorders are extensively seeking mental health services, yet few papers focus on their unique occupational needs or effective rehabilitation interventions that may alleviate the occupational issues they face. Occupational therapists are encouraged to support engagement in socially valued occupations, while preventing engagement in damaging ones, despite a lack of evidence on the meaning and the lived experiences of people. OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the meaning attributed by people living with personality disorders to their main occupations and the underlying needs they strive to fulfill through occupational engagement, whether or not these occupations are sanctioned. METHODS: This exploratory study rests on a descriptive interpretative methodology. The participants were ten men and women, aged between 18 and 35 years old and living with a Cluster B personality disorder. A semistructured interview guide allowed participants to build narratives on occupations that are important to them and discuss how these occupations shape their identity. A thematic content analysis fostered the development of a coding structure that reflected a first-account perspective. RESULTS: The narratives provided by the participants depict a variety of meaningful occupations, many of which are socially disapproved. Many of these occupations serve as a coping strategy to deal with distressing situations, to connect with others who share similar life experiences, or to reestablish a fragile sense of control. Other occupations are socially disapproved due to the overinvestment of the participants' commitment. While participants described how this overinvestment allowed them to control destructive impulses, significant others perceived it as counterproductive and unnecessary. Participants perceived self-care occupations as painful and tedious chores or meaningless occupations. Engaging in productive occupations allowed some participants to gain recognition or to identify their competencies, but also confirmed their differences, creating some form of alienation or marginalisation. CONCLUSION: This exploratory study invites clinicians and researchers to develop a more responsive understanding of occupational engagement for this population. The results highlight the importance of situating occupations in their context, while endorsing a first-account perspective, to better understand the forces that shape occupational engagement. Ultimately, occupational therapists should critically appraise their assumptions around healthy and unsanctioned occupations, in order to respond with sensitivity to the needs and experience of their clients, without perpetuating the marginalisation and discrimination they face.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.000

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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.383 · 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