Ontario Society of Occupational Therapists Perceptual Evaluation (OSOT)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Ontario Society of Occupational Therapists Perceptual Evaluation (OSOT) (1972) is a standardized assessment developed to test the perceptual capabilities of impaired individuals and its results can provide a measure of an individual’s perceptual dysfunction in areas related to basic living skills, determine his or her degree of impairment, monitor change, and measure the effects of treatment and/or spontaneous recovery ( Boys, Fisher, & Holzberg, 1991 ; Toglia & Kirk, 2000 ). The OSOT consists of 18 tasks organized into 6 functional areas that measure (1) scanning neglect, (2) apraxia, (3) body awareness, (4) visual agnosia, (5) spatial relations, (6) and stereognosis. Each subtest is in the form of behavioral performance tasks that test an individual’s motor skills, eye-hand coordination, and visual recognition ( Boys, Fisher, Holzberg, & Reid, 1988 ). The test involves several activities such as recognizing an object using only touch (stereognosis), scanning items for elimination (visual scanning), solving a puzzle of a human figure (body awareness), and stacking blocks (spatial relations). The assessment uses variable 5-point interval scoring systems (0 to 4) that are unique for each item. For example, the ability to manipulate wire grommet devices would be scored as (4) 30 seconds or less to complete 3 tasks, (3) 31 to 60 seconds, (2) 61 to 90 seconds, or (1) unable to complete in less than 91 seconds. The OSOT can be completed in less than 30 minutes with lower scores suggesting more severe impairment.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.006 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".