Pratique centrée sur la personne dans un contexte de réforme : une étude exploratoire auprès d'ergothérapeutes québécois
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peu d’études empiriques ont examiné la pratique centrée sur la personne des ergothérapeutes en tenant compte du contexte de la santé et des services sociaux. À la suite des réorganisations administratives au Québec, les ergothérapeutes font face au défi de maintenir les meilleures pratiques dans leur milieu. Comment est-il possible de maintenir une pratique centrée sur la personne dans un tel contexte ? Par conséquent, l’objectif de la présente étude est de décrire les perceptions d’ergothérapeutes québécois de leur pratique centrée sur la personne dans le contexte actuel des restructurations du réseau de la santé et des services sociaux. Une étude exploratoire descriptive a été réalisée via un sondage à l’aide d’un questionnaire électronique. Cent-huit ergothérapeutes québécois, âgés de 25 à 56 ans, ont répondu au sondage. Une majorité des répondants partagent l’opinion qu’ils font face à des directives fluctuantes pour l’organisation des services à l’intérieur de leur programme (72,2 %), qu’ils doivent évaluer les patients, intervenir auprès d’eux et les transférer à un rythme plus rapide (72,2 %), sont contraints de donner des services morcelés à la clientèle (67,6 %) et font face à des incertitudes quant à leur rattachement à un programme (60,2 %), ce qui décrit en partie leur perception du contexte dans lequel ils travaillent. Parmi les répondants, 25,3 % ne considèrent pas avoir une pratique centrée sur la personne. L’étude a montré que certains éléments de la pratique centrée sur la personne sont difficiles à mettre en pratique, soit : impliquer les proches du patient pendant tout le processus, que le patient établisse ses propres objectifs et adopter une perspective écologique de celui-ci. ____________________________________________________________________________ Person-centered practice in a context of reform: an exploratory study of Quebec occupational therapists Few empirical studies have examined the practice of occupational therapists within the context of health services. Following administrative reorganizations in Quebec, occupational therapists face the challenge of maintaining best practices in their community. How is it possible to maintain a person-centered practice in such a context? Therefore, the objective of this study is to describe the perceptions of occupational therapists in Quebec about their person-centered practice in the current context of health system reorganization. A descriptive exploratory study was conducted via a survey using an electronic questionnaire. 108 occupational therapists from Quebec, aged 25 to 56, completed the survey. Respondents agree that they face fluctuating explanations for organizing services within their program (72,2%), need to assess, intervene and transfer patients at a faster pace (60,2%), are forced to provide fragmented services to clients (67,6%) and face uncertainties about their attachment to a program (60,2%), what describe their perception of the context in which they work. Among the respondents, 25,3% do not consider having a person-centered practice. The study has shown that some elements of the person-centered practice are difficult for respondents to implement: patient's relatives being engaged throughout the whole process, patient sets his own objectives and therefore adopting an ecological perspective.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".