Breakfast Club : a Functional Approach To Achieving Occupational Therapy Rehabilitation intensity Goals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: In 2016, the inpatient stroke rehabilitation occupational therapy (OT) team at Hamilton Health Sciences (HHS) initiated the development of a therapeutic group called u2018Breakfast Clubu2019. This program was developed to improve OT rehabilitation intensity goals, while providing functional rehabilitation opportunities. In Canada, rehabilitation intensity is the time that patients are engaged in individualized & task-specific treatment with a therapist. Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations (CSBPR) advises that patients should receive such therapy 3 hours/day, 5 days/week.[i]Summary: Breakfast Club is a weekly 1.5 hour therapeutic group with an occupational therapist, OTA/PTA, and 2-4 patients. The group occurs in a circuit format that includes chopping vegetables, making coffee, preparing breakfast, cooking at the stove, eating, and washing dishes. The circuit format allows more opportunity for direct therapy & monitoring of patients by a therapist, which increases rehabilitation intensity time. Breakfast Club provides a functional context for patients to work on individualized goals, including upper extremity task-specific training, cognitive remediation, visual scanning, balance & mobility, social interaction & communication, and/or practice using compensatory strategies or equipment. It also addresses CSBPR recommendations for individualized interventions with an aim of resuming participation in desired activities for patients with impaired cognition post-stroke.[ii]Conclusion: CSBPR states that in stroke rehabilitation, more therapy results in better patient outcomes.[iii] Breakfast Club is an innovative method utilized by the HHS inpatient stroke rehabilitation OT team to increase rehabilitation intensity time.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.004 |
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".