Self-directed Goals for Forensic Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients within a forensic setting experience occupational deprivation. This impacts their mental health outcomes, aggressive tendencies, and overall wellness. The purpose of this study was to explore how the setting and achieving of self-directed goals impact forensic patients’ occupational deprivation. The study was a single-group, pre- and post-test pilot study. Participants completed the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) before and after a 10-week treatment period. Treatment included an educational group therapy session one time a week aimed at goal setting and a one-to-one session once per week aimed at setting goals and achieving them. Observation notes were completed after every group and one to one session. They were reviewed by three researchers to identify common themes. The study was completed at an inpatient forensic hospital. Participants resided on the most stable unit of the hospital due to the long-term nature of their stay. Participants had a variety of severe mental health diagnoses. They were included in the study if they had been hospitalized for a year at the time of recruitment, had not had a behavioral incident that resulted in manual restraints for a year at the time of recruitment, did not have a primary diagnosis of Antisocial Personality Disorder, did not have an imminent discharge date, and had signed the consent form. Nine patients signed the consent form and eight completed the study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".