↓ Skip to main content

Contemporary occupational therapy practice: The challenges of being evidence based and philosophically congruent

Overview of attention for article published in Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, February 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
131 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Contemporary occupational therapy practice: The challenges of being evidence based and philosophically congruent
Published in
Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, February 2014
DOI 10.1111/1440-1630.12110
Pubmed ID
Authors

Louise Gustafsson, Matthew Molineux, Sally Bennett

Abstract

Several authors have written of the need to embrace occupation and use it to energise our practice, research and education for the benefit of the profession, individual occupational therapists and ultimately, and most significantly, our clients. However, Wilcock (1999) best summarises the issues and the work that must be done, calling for the profession to adopt a consistent professional philosophy. This approach is entirely congruent with the paradigm approach proposed by Kielhofner (2009). Reinforcing the ideas of Doris Sym, Wilcock (p. 192) states that ‘the first essential for each individual in any profession is the acceptance of a philosophy that is the profession’s keystone.’ Wilcock is clear that such a philosophy should not be adopted and enacted in a rigid way, but it should be dynamic so as to enable the profession to respond to research and theories, and changes in the world. In essence, a professional philosophy should guide research, education and practice and be a touchstone when considering potential changes to practice. It is our suggestion that occupational therapists, individually and collectively, need to use our occupational philosophy, currently best operationalised by the Contemporary Paradigm, to inform EBP. In conclusion, we again find ourselves at a cross road for the profession with the occupational philosophy of the Contemporary Paradigm at times challenged by the adoption of research evidence into practice. We would encourage all occupational therapists to engage in EBP but do so ever mindful of its complexity. We would suggest that evidence-based decision making is viewed through the lens of the occupational therapy philosophy, with occupational therapists critically questioning whether or not the ‘procedure’ for which there is evidence is consistent with the Contemporary Paradigm. This is a complex matter, with many remaining issues to be explored. We would encourage all occupational therapists to interrogate the ways in which they implement EBP and consider the extent to which the profession’s philosophy guides practice decisions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
South Africa 2 2%
Portugal 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Unknown 125 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 36 27%
Student > Bachelor 28 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Professor > Associate Professor 6 5%
Other 22 17%
Unknown 24 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 53 40%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 18%
Social Sciences 18 14%
Psychology 4 3%
Philosophy 2 2%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 25 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 January 2023.
All research outputs
#4,201,985
of 25,707,225 outputs
Outputs from Australian Occupational Therapy Journal
#112
of 734 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,910
of 324,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Australian Occupational Therapy Journal
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,707,225 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 734 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.