Parenting and Occupational Therapy: An Exploration of Global Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Occupational therapists recognize parenting as within their scope; however, little is known about how this translates to practice with adult clients with disabilities or other challenges. We sought to describe contemporary global occupational therapy practice for parenting with adult clients, including assessment and interventions. A cross-sectional e-survey designed for the study was implemented in eight languages. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling. Responses were received from 1,357 occupational therapists across 42 countries. Of these, 43.1% ( n = 586) frequently ask their clients who are parents about parenting roles and occupations, while 34.2% ( n = 465) frequently or very frequently address parenting concerns. Assessments typically relied on informal approaches or the use of broad measures of occupational performance. The most frequently reported parenting intervention was the provision of education and training in parenting skills. Occupational therapy practice for parenting remains underdeveloped, with limited evidence of comprehensive occupational therapy assessment or intervention.
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 | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".