The responsiveness of the Danish version of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: To establish the responsiveness of the Danish version of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM-DK). Method: A cross-sectional study was performed in three Danish settings, including 88 clients, 40 men, aged 16-90 years, with a variety of diagnoses. To determine construct responsiveness, the mean changes of the COPM performance and satisfaction score (COPM-P/S) were compared and correlated with the mean changes in the five-item World Health Organization (WHO) Well-Being Index (WHO-5) and the EuroQol-five domains-five levels questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). To determine the responsiveness, data were analysed with ROC curves to establish the optimal cut-point values for the COPM-DK scores. Minimal important change (MIC) was assessed in relation to anchor-based questions. Results: The mean change for COPM-P/S was 3.1 and 3.0, respectively. Small positive correlations were found between the COPM-DK scores and the WHO-5 and EQ-5D-5L scores. The AUC were 0.76 and 0.75, respectively. The optimal cut-point values for the COPM-P/S-scores based on either all positive answers or to the two highest, were 1.2 or 4.20 (COPM-P) and 1.67 or 5.80 (COPM-S), respectively. Conclusions: The capability of the COPM to detect changes in perceived occupational performance issues is supported. We recommend an MIC on 3.5 points on both scales.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".