The effectiveness of occupational therapy in enabling adults with a diagnosis of depression to improve their function and meaningful participation; a mixed methods study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: \nDepression is a leading cause of disability and is characterised by a loss of interest in \nactivities as well as difficulty carrying out everyday activities. Occupational therapy aims \nto enable people to participate in the daily activities they want or need to do to improve \nhealth and well-being, however there is a limited evidence base relating to the \neffectiveness and impact of occupational therapy in depression. \nPurpose \nThis mixed-methods study aimed to (a) evaluate the effectiveness of individualised \noccupational therapy in enabling individuals with a diagnosis of depression to improve \ntheir occupational functioning and participation in everyday activities and (b), identify \nthe most effective components of occupational therapy from the perspective of service \nusers. \nMethod: \nA single group pretest-posttest study design was used utilising the following outcome \nmeasures: Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Beck Depression \nInventory II (BDI II), Work and Social Adjustment Scale (WSAS), Utrecht Scale for \nEvaluation of Rehabilitation-Participation (User-P) and the Short Form-36 Health Survey \n(SF-36). Semi-structured interviews were undertaken at completion of the intervention. \nMethods of data analysis included correlations, paired t tests and descriptive statistics \nfor the quantitative data, and thematic analysis for the interview data. \nFindings \nQuantitative findings show statistically significant improvements in the COPM-P, COPMS, BDI II, WSAS, two scales of the USER-P and three scales of the SF-36 outcome measure. \nIn addition, correlation analysis suggested a tendency for those participants who had \nmore occupational therapy to have better outcomes suggesting preliminary indication \nof a ‘dose-response’ relationship relating to the amount of occupational therapy people \nreceive.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".