Evaluation of occupational therapy in persons with COVID-19: a pre-post observational cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Persons with COVID-19 may experience limitations in daily functioning and can be referred to occupational therapy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate changes in daily functioning, cognitive complaints, fatigue and self-management of persons with COVID-19 who received occupational therapy in primary care.To get insights in the volume and duration of occupational therapy. DESIGN: A pre-post observational cohort study from October 2020 until April 2021. SETTING: Fifty-eight occupational therapy practices in primary care throughout the Netherlands participated with 68 occupational therapists. PARTICIPANTS: 228 adults (≥18 years) with COVID-19, referred to occupational therapy, gave informed consent and participated in the pre-post evaluation. The mean age was 49 years (SD 13) and 79% of the patients was female. The most frequently reported complaints included fatigue and cognitive complaints. INTERVENTIONS: Occupational therapy using Dutch guidelines for occupational therapy in clients with COVID-19. OUTCOME MEASURES: Performance and satisfaction with performance using the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM); the impact of Cognitive Complaints on Participation (CoCo-P); and daily activities, self-management and perceived contribution of occupational therapy using the Patient Reported Outcome Measure for Occupational Therapy (PROM-OT). RESULTS: COPM-performance score improved with a mean difference of 2.9 points (95% CI 2.7 to 3.2), and COPM-satisfaction score improved with 3.2 points (95% CI 2.9 to 3.5). CoCo-P score improved with a mean difference of 20.9 points (95% CI from 14.4 to 27.4), and PROM-OT improved with 42.8 points (95% CI from 40.2 to 45.4). Participants received a median of seven sessions of occupational therapy (IQR 5-10) with a median duration of 18 weeks (IQR 12-25). They valued the contribution of occupational therapy to their improved functioning with a mean score of 8 (SD 1.4) and recommended this to others with a mean score of 9 (SD 1.2). CONCLUSIONS: Persons with COVID-19 who received occupational therapy in primary care improved significantly in daily functioning and highly valued occupational therapy.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".