MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157009888

Mettre en œuvre les valeurs fondamentales de l’identité professionnelle des ergothérapeutes : résultats d’une enquête

2021· article· fr· W3157009888 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueErgothérapies · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction. Bien que les valeurs professionnelles qui fondent l’ergotherapie soient constitutives de l’identite professionnelle des ergotherapeutes, peu d’etudes empiriques se sont attardees a documenter leur mise en œuvre dans la pratique par les ergotherapeutes francais. Objectifs. Les objectifs de l’etude etaient de : 1) reperer les valeurs professionnelles les plus faciles et les plus difficiles a mettre en œuvre en pratique et 2) documenter la nature des barrieres et des facilitateurs au respect de ces valeurs en pratique. Methode. Les resultats rapportes dans cet article decoulent d’une etude descriptive transversale a laquelle 149 ergotherapeutes francais ont pris part. Resultats. Premierement, l’empathie est la valeur qui est percue comme la plus facile a appliquer en pratique, et ce, par le plus grand nombre d’ergotherapeutes, tandis que l’innovation est la valeur jugee la plus difficile a mettre en œuvre en pratique, par le plus grand nombre de participants. Deuxiemement, les barrieres a l’application des valeurs professionnelles que les ergotherapeutes estiment rencontrer les plus frequemment relevent de leur milieu (meso-environnement) ou de la societe (macro-environnement), tandis que leurs facilitateurs relevent essentiellement des personnes et de leurs interactions (micro-environnement). Conclusion. Les resultats de la presente etude temoignent d’un changement identitaire chez les ergotherapeutes francais, en cela qu’ils se distinguent des constats issus d’etudes anterieures. Les resultats relatifs a la nature des barrieres et des facilitateurs les plus frequents rejoignent, quant a eux, ceux d’une enquete similaire menee au Quebec, mettant ainsi en evidence une part d’universalite dans l’experience des ergotherapeutes relativement a la mise en œuvre des valeurs phares de la profession dans le quotidien de la pratique.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.534
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.343 · 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