MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401899041 · doi:10.1055/a-2346-4598

Canadian Model of Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) in der Rehabilitation – eine Übersicht

2024· article· de· W4401899041 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jana Veelenturf

Bibliographic record

Venueneuroreha · 2024
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Practices and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMeasure (data warehouse)PsychologyMedicinePhysical therapyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Warum sind konkrete Ziele wichtig in der Rehabilitation? Die Ziele in der Rehabilitation unterscheiden sich stark von Patient zu Patient und sind äußerst individuell. Während der eine Patient bereits eine genaue Vorstellung davon hat, was er während der Rehabilitation erreichen möchte, empfindet der andere es als schwierig, klare Ziele zu definieren. Daher ist es entscheidend, die Patienten von Beginn ihrer Rehabilitation dabei zu unterstützen, ihre Ziele zu identifizieren und zu konkretisieren. Als wichtiges Instrument bietet sich das Canadian Model of Occupational Measure an, das die Bereiche Selbstversorgung, Produktivität und Freizeit beleuchtet. Publication History Article published online: 27 August 2024 © 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

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 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)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.326 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueneurorehaSame topicMedical Practices and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207