Uporaba ocenjevalnih instrumentov za oceno kognitivnih sposobnosti v delovni terapiji
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction:In recent years, the number of people aged 65 and over worldwide has increased dramatically.Therefore, it is important to be aware of the changes that occur as a consequence of aging.One of these is the decline in cognitive abilities which are crucial for carrying out everyday functions and activities.Occupational therapists treating older adults assess their cognitive abilities to find out to what extent there has been a decline and why and how the changes affect the performance of activities of daily living.The results of the assessment guide occupational therapists and measure the success of the progress.For this purpose, they have several cognitive standardized and non-standardized instruments to choose from.Purpose: To review the standardized cognitive assessment instruments most commonly used in occupational therapy and to determine their usefulness.Methods: The literature search was conducted using the Cochrane Library, Cinahl, Medline Plus, OT Seeker, PubMed, and Sage.In the final results, we used articles published after the year 2010.The articles had to report on research done in the field of occupational therapy assessment instruments for older adults, both in the area of cognitive decline and in the area of assessment of body structure and physical function.For the thesis, 15 scientific articles were used.Results: We found that occupational therapists most commonly use the Mini-Mental State Examination, the Clock Drawing Test, the Loewenstein Cognitive Assessment, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment when treating clients with cognitive decline.All assessment instruments have in common that they are standardized, reliable, valid, and suitable for clients aged 65 years or older.More than one assessment is most often needed to assess the actual condition of the user.Discussion and conclusion: Evaluation in occupational therapy is an important part of treatment.It is important that the occupational therapist knows the user, and his/her problems and then decides on an appropriate assessment form.Occupational therapists around the world are increasingly striving to implement reliable and valid assessment instruments in therapy because they make it easier for them to justify and support their treatment decisions with evidence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".