MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924620780 · doi:10.5014/ajot.2019.028753

Reliability and Validity of a Functional Cognition Screening Tool to Identify the Need for Occupational Therapy

2019· article· en· W2924620780 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dorothy Farrar Edwards, Timothy Wolf, Timothy S. Marks, Sarah Alter, Victoria Larkin, Braeden L. Padesky, Meredith Spiers, Muhammad O. Al‐Heizan, Gordon Muir Giles

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsActivities of daily livingMedicineOccupational therapyOrthopedic surgeryCognitionIndependent livingMedicaidPhysical therapyGerontologyNeuropsychologyGeriatricsFamily medicineHealth carePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has identified the need to assess functional cognition as part of the postacute care planning process. OBJECTIVE: We examined the reliability, validity, and clinical utility of the Menu Task (MT) as a screening measure of functional cognition to assess the need for occupational therapy services. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study testing a convenience sample of community-dwelling older adults (n = 130) and adults hospitalized for elective orthopedic surgery (n = 60). The MT and four neuropsychological screening tests-the Brief Interview of Mental Status, the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Trail Making Tests A and B, and an instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) scale-were administered. SETTING: Community-dwelling participants were tested at the University of Wisconsin occupational therapy program and in community settings. Hospitalized participants were tested at the University of Missouri Orthopedic Institute. PARTICIPANTS: We recruited healthy community-dwelling adults in Madison, WI (community sample; n = 130) and patients hospitalized for elective orthopedic surgery in Columbia, MO (hospital sample; n = 60). Inclusion criteria were age 55 yr or older, living in the community, and willingness to be tested in English; for the hospital sample, participants had to be referred for elective orthopedic surgery requiring a hospital stay and be independent in activities of daily living before being admitted for surgery. RESULTS: We found significant differences between groups classified as impaired or not impaired on the basis of MT scores. Participants classified as impaired on the MT performed significantly less well than those classified as not impaired on the neurocognitive and IADL measures. CONCLUSION: The reliability and validity of the MT were supported. WHAT THIS ARTICLE ADDS: The American Occupational Therapy Association and the occupational therapy experts advising CMS have stressed the importance of a brief performance-based screening tool to identify people who need more comprehensive occupational therapy evaluation. The implementation of a functional cognition screening tool as part of the required CMS assessment protocol should greatly increase the number of patients referred for occupational therapy evaluation and treatment. The MT has the capacity to address the gap in the proposed CMS assessment of Medicare recipients across postacute care settings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.296
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations28
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive DisordersFrench-language works237,207