MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3020208774 · doi:10.5014/ajot.2020.033936

Exploring Culture and Therapeutic Communication: Therapeutic Mode Use by Occupational Therapists in the United States and Singapore

2020· article· en· W3020208774 on OpenAlexaff
Su Ren Wong, Chia-Wei Fan, Helene J. Polatajko

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Occupational Therapy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOccupational therapyTherapeutic relationshipSpecialtyObservational studyPsychologyMedicineMode (computer interface)Clinical psychologyPsychotherapistPhysical therapyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

IMPORTANCE: According to the Intentional Relationship Model, six therapeutic modes characterize client-therapist interactions in occupational therapy: advocating, collaborating, empathizing, encouraging, instructing, and problem solving. However, whether these modes hold across cultural contexts is not clear. OBJECTIVE: To compare therapeutic mode use in occupational therapy interactions in the United States and Singapore. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study; questionnaires were collected and compared from two convenience samples of occupational therapists from the United States and Singapore, and results were analyzed using t tests and general linear modeling. SETTING: Large tertiary hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Occupational therapists were recruited if they had at least 6 mo experience in their clinical specialty. Adult client participants were recruited if they had or planned to have at least three occupational therapy sessions. OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The therapist version of the Clinical Assessment of Modes (CAM-T) was used to assess occupational therapists' therapeutic mode use in interactions with specific clients. RESULTS: A total of 74 U.S. and 39 Singaporean client-therapist interactions were assessed. U.S. therapists were more likely to use the upper end of the response scale; after we corrected for this, the pattern of mode use was similar in both cultural contexts, with instructing mode used the most. In absolute terms, U.S. therapists used the instructing mode more frequently than Singaporean therapists. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Further research should be done to examine the sociocultural factors that affect responses on the CAM-T and mode use. WHAT THIS ARTICLE ADDS: This study is the first to compare therapeutic mode use in different cultural settings. With the globalization of occupational therapy practice, it is important to consider the generalizability of occupational therapy concepts across cultures.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.451
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.049 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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