MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2956811735 · doi:10.15453/2168-6408.1544

The Student Perspective on Role-Emerging Fieldwork Placements in Occupational Therapy: A Review of the Literature

2019· review· en· W2956811735 on OpenAlexaff
Mathew Lau, Michael J. Ravenek

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Open Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational therapyThematic analysisAutonomyPerspective (graphical)CitationMedical educationPsychologyMedicineQualitative researchPolitical scienceSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Role-emerging fieldwork placements are increasingly being used in entry-level occupational therapy programs. However, published reviews have yet to focus on synthesizing the experiences and perspectives of students. This review aims to identify the opportunities, challenges, and future directions of role-emerging fieldwork placements based on the student perspective. A literature review using scoping review methods was conducted, including an electronic database search, hand-searching of journals, and citation tracking. Descriptive and thematic analyses of the articles were performed. Thirty articles were identified through the literature search. Themes that emerged related to opportunities were professional and personal development, independence and autonomy, client-centeredness, and new occupational therapy perspective. Themes that emerged related to challenges were defining a professional role, lack of structure and support, and high level of responsibility. Future directions centered on recommendations for future students and establishing roles within sites. Students benefited from the self-directed nature and client-centered practice in their role-emerging fieldwork placements, while the challenging environment contributed to their overall development. Students recognized a need for occupational therapy services in the wider community and saw role-emerging settings as legitimate career opportunities. Future research is encouraged to explore peer models, student-initiated role-emerging fieldwork placements, and postgraduate experiences.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.000
Research integrity0.0000.004
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 head0.379
GPT teacher head0.625
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Open Journal of Occupational TherapySame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207