MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6901940491 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.12091893

Practices and views of occupational therapists in Nova Scotia regarding wheelchair-skills training for clients and their caregivers: an online survey

2020· article· en· W6901940491 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrainerNova scotiaTraining (meteorology)WheelchairPerceptionSession (web analytics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To determine the extent to which Occupational Therapists (OTs) in Nova Scotia (NS) conduct wheelchair skills training, the nature of training and the OTs’ perceptions on training. Materials and methods: Anonymous online survey. Results: We received 110 responses from OTs living in NS and involved in direct patient care, 96 (93%) of whom reported helping clients obtain manual wheelchairs. Of the OTs who responded to the question “…do you typically provide wheelchair-skills training…?”, 40 (43.5%) answered “Yes, usually” for clients and 40 (46.0%) for caregivers. The median duration of training sessions for clients and caregivers was 30 and 20 min; the median number of sessions was 2 and 1. Regarding the importance of training, 65 (73.9%) OTs answered “Very important” and 22 (25%) “Somewhat important” for clients and 55 (64.0%) answered “Very important” and 29 (33.7%) “Somewhat important” for caregivers. About one-third of OTs considered themselves adequately prepared for the trainer role. A variety of barriers and facilitators to training were identified. Trainers were significantly more likely than non-trainers to consider wheelchair skills training as important (p = .0003 for clients and p = .0039 for caregivers) and to consider themselves adequately prepared for the trainer role (p = .002 for clients and .003 for caregivers). Conclusions: Only a minority of NS OTs usually provide wheelchair-skills training for clients or their caregivers and the training provided is minimal, despite a majority who consider such training to be important. Only about one-third of OTs feel prepared for the training role.Implications for rehabilitationOnly a minority of Occupational Therapists (OTs) in Nova Scotia, Canada usually provide wheelchair-skills training for clients or their caregivers.The training that is provided is minimal.A majority of OTs consider such training to be important.Only about one-third of OTs feel prepared for the training role. Only a minority of Occupational Therapists (OTs) in Nova Scotia, Canada usually provide wheelchair-skills training for clients or their caregivers. The training that is provided is minimal. A majority of OTs consider such training to be important. Only about one-third of OTs feel prepared for the training role.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.366
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.652
GPT teacher head0.550
Teacher spread0.102 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshare→Same topicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research→French-language works237,207→