Práctica del terapeuta ocupacional para el adulto con síndrome de Down y enfermedad de Alzheimer
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey was conducted with occupational therapists having clinical experience in providing interventions for adults with Down syndrome. Forty-three occupational therapists from Australia, Canada, United Kingdom and the United States of America participated in the survey. Two-thirds were from the United Kingdom, most of whom were employed in the public sector and had at least 10 years of clinical experience. Over 90% of respondents received one or more referrals in a typical month for adults with Down syndrome having dementia, 68% of which were for a decline in activities of daily living. Home environment and activities of daily living were frequently assessed areas, and the commonest interventions were compensatory strategies and environmental modifications. Only half the respondents provided interventions for informal caregivers. Risk and safety and manual handling were frequently addressed domains for informal caregivers. Collaboration and developing clinical expertise were the two key perceived enablers for providing effective occupational therapy services. Fragmentation of services and a lack of client-centred care were the common perceived barriers.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 it