Organizational Workplace Mental Health: An Emerging Role for Occupational Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is threefold: firstly, to provide a brief overview of current practice in workplace mental health and introduce an emerging role for occupational therapy in this field (i.e., practicing at the organizational level where “clients” are workplaces or organizations, and not individual workers); secondly, to present the findings from a small qualitative study which describes this emerging role from the perspectives of occupational therapists who have worked in this area; and thirdly, to provide suggestions for future work which could advance this emerging role for occupational therapy world-wide.KEY MESSAGESPrevious research suggests that there is an increasing interest among employers to address workplace mental health through organizational initiatives and that occupational therapists are beginning to consult on the topic.Occupational therapists in our small qualitative study described their role in organizational workplace mental health as one which involves adopting a business lens, practicing in an organization-centred manner, and focusing on population health promotion.Suggestions for future work to advance this emerging role include identifying the fundamental elements of the business lens, investigating models and frameworks to guide organization-centred practice, evaluating the short-, medium-, and long-term outcomes of interventions, exploring the fit between an occupational perspective and workplace mental health, and examining the impact of COVID-19 on current practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".