MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2929745751 · doi:10.1080/0164212x.2019.1588832

Occupational Therapy Interventions in Mental Health: A Literature Review in Search of Evidence

2019· review· en· W2929745751 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 in Mental Health · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychoeducationPsychological interventionMental healthOccupational therapyIntervention (counseling)Mental illnessMedicinePsychologyPsychiatryClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A growing body of literature sheds light on occupational therapy (OT) interventions and outcomes in adult mental health. Although this research has not developed to the point where a systematic review is warranted, a synthesis of these findings is needed. This article provides an overview of OT interventions in adult mental health and their documented outcomes. Fifty peer-reviewed intervention studies targeting adults with mental illness were reviewed. Seven categories of interventions emerged: employment/education; psychoeducation; creative occupations/activity; time use/occupational balance; skills/habit development; group/family approaches; and animal-assisted therapy. Further research involving rigorous designs is needed to establish a solid evidence base for OT interventions in adult mental health.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.807
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.667
GPT teacher head0.666
Teacher spread0.001 · 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