Occupational Concepts: An Underutilized Resource to Further Disabled People and Others Being Occupied: A Scoping Review
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
Background: Being occupied is an important factor in human well-being and ranges from paid and unpaid work to activities of daily living. Various occupational concepts that do not contain health in the phrase such as “occupational justice” are employed to engage with the social barriers people experience in being occupied. The aim of this study was to understand better to what extent the non-health occupational concepts are used in the academic literature to discuss the social barriers disabled people face in being occupied and whether these occupational concepts are used to enrich discussions in areas that impact the reality of occupation in general such as equity/equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI), science and technology governance, well-being and the impact of environmental issues. Methods: a scoping review of academic abstracts employing SCOPUS, the 70 databases of EBSCO-HOST and Web of Science was performed. Results: We found 24,104 abstracts for the 28 occupational concepts we used in general and 624 abstracts in conjunction with disability terms. Of these 28 occupational concepts, “occupational performance” was mentioned the most (in 9739 of the 24,104 and 397 of the 624 abstracts). The next concept “occupational engagement” was already present in one tenth or less. Occupational justice was present in 700 of the 24,104 and 14 of the 624 abstracts. Furthermore, within the 24,104 and 624 abstracts EDI, science and technology governance, environmental topics, and well-being measures were rarely or not mentioned. Most of the 624 abstracts originated from occupational therapy journals. Only 23 of the 624 abstracts originated from journals with “disability”, and none with “disability studies” in the title. Conclusion: Non-health occupational concepts are underutilized in discourses that focus on decreasing the social barriers to being occupied in general and in relation to disabled people, which is a missed opportunity and should be fixed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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