The use of the term ‘occupational profile’ in occupational therapy and occupational science literature: A scoping review

Abstract

Introduction

The term ‘occupational profile’ is widely used within the occupational therapy profession; however, its use and application appear inconsistent in the literature. Understanding how occupational profile is described in existing literature can reduce ambiguity and strengthen consistent use of terminology across practice and research.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted to examine how occupational profile has been described in occupational therapy and occupational science literature.

Results

Seventy-six journal papers were included. A lack of consistent definitions, conceptualisation and measurements was identified. Key concepts relating to the conceptualisation of occupational profile included occupational history, motivation and performance. Only one measurement was used consistently with paediatric clients to identify individuals’ occupational profiles. Occupational profiles of populations and communities were not identified.

Conclusion

The lack of consistency in definitions, conceptualisation and measurement of the term ‘occupational profile’ presents significant issues for occupational therapy practice, including an inability to compare populations. Researchers should articulate their conceptualisation of occupational profile in the absence of a universally agreed-upon definition. More comprehensive measures seeking to explore the occupational profile of a variety of clients need to be developed. Occupational profiles of communities and populations should be explored to understand occupational patterns and identify potential occupational issues.

Keywords

Occupational science activity profile occupational history occupational profile scoping review

Introduction

‘Occupational profile’ is a term of relevance within the occupational therapy profession (American Occupational Therapy Association, 2020) that has been presented in occupational therapy literature for over 40 years with various definitions and applications. Within the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process, Fourth Edition (AOTA, 2020), there is considerable emphasis on exploring an occupational profile during the occupational therapy process to understand the client’s perspective and background. Furthermore, it is recommended in Kearney et al. (2018) Guidelines for Documentation of Occupational Therapy that therapists should document their clients’ occupational profiles and adjust practice accordingly as progress is made through the occupational therapy process. The information obtained from an occupational profile contributes to an individualised approach to the evaluation, intervention planning and implementation stages of the occupational therapy practice process (AOTA, 2020). The American Occupational Therapy Association (AOTA, 2021) argues that consistently developing and documenting such a profile is the first step in improving the quality of occupational therapy services and demonstrates the profession’s distinct value to other health professions and clients. Additionally, the profile demonstrates occupational therapy practitioners’ commitment to clients as collaborators in the occupational therapy process and facilitates client-centred practice (AOTA, 2021).

Like many concepts used within the profession, the conceptualisation of the term ‘occupational profile’ lacks consensus. In early literature, MacKinnon et al. (1994) described occupational profile as time spent in work, leisure and activities of daily living. The definition of occupational profile has since developed. In 2002, AOTA defined the term as ‘information that described the client’s occupational history, experiences, patterns of daily living, interests, values and needs’ (p. 616). Radomski and Latham (2014) defined occupational profile as a summary of information related to the client’s history, resources and performance. More recently, Molineux (2017) defined occupational profile as ‘a summary of the information often gathered as part of the initial interview such as occupational history, occupational patterns, occupational issues, barriers, enablers and occupational diagnosis’. These definitions reveal common terms such as ‘history’ and ‘patterns’ as well as variations and inconsistencies in terminology.

Having a coherent professional vocabulary is important to occupational therapists in explaining the purpose and process of occupational therapy to clients and other health professionals, and for maintaining a strong professional identity (Creek and Lawson-Porter, 2010). Wilding and Whiteford (2008) and Turner and Knight (2015) found occupational therapists experience difficulties describing what occupational therapy is and what it involves. Therapists often avoid using occupational therapy specific language resulting in a lack of professional identity and representation (Wilding and Whiteford, 2008). Having a lack of clear professional identity has profound effects on the profession (Turner and Knight, 2015). As an example, it can lead to practitioners being over-influenced by other professions, leading to the use of biomedical language rather than undertaking and articulating their practice from an occupational perspective (Britton et al., 2015; Murray et al., 2015). Unifying language can enhance professional identity and the understanding and representation of occupational therapy (Wilding and Whiteford, 2008).

Term clarification is topical in occupational therapy. As examples, Backman (2004) described the vague and poorly defined concept of occupational balance. Further analysis of the term was completed by Wagman et al. (2012), who identified that occupational balance had been measured using different methods, creating difficulties in gaining of systematic knowledge in relation to the concept. Walder et al. (2021) argued that a lack of clarity regarding the term occupational adaptation contributed to difficulties applying the concept consistently across theory, practice and research. They concluded that further refinement of the term would lead to improved clinical utility (Walder et al., 2021). Further, work by Hansson et al. (2022), examining the use of the term occupational identity, suggested that conceptual clarity was vital in order to improve research and use of the term throughout occupational therapy. Across these papers, there is argument that when terms in occupational therapy are used without consistency, it creates challenges for theory-to-practice integration and professional identity within health care. Additionally, these papers argue that development of concepts and terms supports development of theory, practice and research. Occupational therapists are often requested, by funding bodies, to complete an occupational profile to support provision of services and equipment. Term clarity supports occupational therapists to do this in consistent ways and further supports university programs to prepare graduates for this practice.

Despite the widespread use of the term ‘occupational profile’, only one scoping review has examined the term to date. Eschenfelder and Gavalas (2018) explored the evidence regarding the effectiveness of expressive art techniques to enhance the occupational profile of clients with communication deficits. Although the review focused on occupational profiles, it failed to explore the use of the term in occupational therapy or occupational science literature. Consequently, it did not address the current gaps in the literature’s conceptualisation, measurement or application of the term occupational profile. Given that occupational profile is a core term within occupational therapy practice, clearly defining it and understanding its use in current literature is imperative to occupational therapy practice and research. For this reason, a scoping review examining how the term occupational profile is described in the occupational therapy and occupational science literature was conducted.

Methods

Study design

A scoping review was chosen to map the literature and understand the scope and size of available research to answer the research question. The scoping review framework described by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) and further refined by Levac et al. (2010) was used. This framework has five stages: (i) identifying the research question, (ii) identifying relevant studies, (iii) study selection, (iv) charting of data and (v) collating, summarising and reporting the results (Arksey and O'Malley, 2005).

Stage 1: Identifying the research question

This review arose as the research team were designing a research study to develop an occupational profile of a group of adults using standardised assessments. In a preliminary literature search, we identified variation in definitions, prompting the need for a comprehensive literature review. Thus, this study was created with the intention of answering the research question: ‘How is the term “occupational profile” described in the occupational therapy and occupational science literature?’

Stage 2: Identifying relevant studies

The search was completed in five databases (CINAHL, Medline, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science), using a search strategy that was created with support from a health librarian. A Boolean search string was developed through the CINAHL Subject Headings. The search terms were (“occupational therap*” OR “occupational science”) AND “occupational profile.” Reference lists of identified articles were searched to discover any additional relevant literature.

Stage 3: Study selection

Studies were included if they met the following pre-determined criteria: (i) published in English; (ii) contained ‘occupational profile’ in the title, abstract or body of the text and (iii) were related to occupational therapy or occupational science. Occupational science-related papers were included as occupational science is the study of humans as occupational beings (Wilcock, 2001). Therefore, it was assumed that the term ‘occupational profile’ might be explored in this body of literature. Journal articles, professional magazines and research theses were included to maximise and broaden the scope of literature, but conference abstracts were excluded due to the minimal content available.

The titles and abstracts of all identified papers were extracted and uploaded into Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation, 2021) for review. Two authors screened titles and abstracts of the retrieved papers to identify relevant literature. When both authors agreed, the paper was forwarded for the full-text review. When authors disagreed, the paper was discussed in a research team meeting and a decision was reached through team discussions. The full text of the retained papers was reviewed by all authors, and conflicts regarding inclusion, quality and relevance were again resolved through discussions at a team meeting. Consistent with scoping review methodology recommended by Arksey and O’Malley (2005), quality assessment of papers reviewed was not performed.

Stage 4: Charting of data

Two authors independently extracted data and the research team then met to discuss any arising differences in data extraction. The data were recorded in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet under headings suggested by Arksey and O’Malley (2005), along with additional headings related to how occupational profile was described in the paper. The information captured was author’s name(s), year of publication, publishing journal, geographical location of the corresponding author, study design, aim/objective, who the occupational profile referred to, how extensively occupational profile was explored, definition of occupational profile, conceptualisation of occupational profile and measures used to capture the occupational profile. The second and third authors confirmed the extracted data by independently completing data extraction.

Stage 5: Collating, summarising and reporting the results

Descriptive numerical analysis was undertaken in an Excel spreadsheet for publication year, publishing journal, type of methodology, country of origin and people being profiled. During data extraction, it became evident that the conceptualisation of occupational profile was inconsistent across the included studies. When authors of included papers described components of their occupational profile, this was recorded into Excel. When they did not, the research team considered key terms described in the studies and linked key concepts together to support interpretation of the existing literature. The process was atheoretical in recognition that included papers were underpinned by different or no specific occupational therapy theories.

Results

Search results

A flow diagram for the selection of included papers based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines (Moher et al., 2009) is shown in Figure 1. A total of 102 papers were initially identified through the database search. Hand-searching of reference lists identified an additional five papers. A column series published in the Journal of Occupational Science was identified. The search term ‘occupational profile’ was applied to the journal to locate all papers in this series, resulting in an additional 25 papers. Forty-three duplicates were removed, resulting in 89 papers undergoing abstract and title screening. Seven papers were excluded in this stage, resulting in 82 papers undergoing full-text review. A further six papers were excluded in this stage as they either did not explore occupational profile, were a newspaper article, a conference abstract or were not related to occupational therapy or occupational science. Consequently, 76 papers were included in this review.

Figure 1.

PRISMA flow diagram showing literature results.

Descriptive numerical summary

The following text describes the 76 papers which are presented across two separate tables. Forty (53%) of the identified papers came from the Occupational Profile Column series published by the Journal of Occupational Science between 1995 and 2020. These are summarised in Supplementary File 1. Table 1 summarises the remaining 36 papers. Articles were published over 40 years, with the vast majority (94%) published between 1999 and 2020. Articles were published in 17 different academic journals, with the most frequent representation in the Journal of Occupational Science (n = 43), British Journal of Occupational Therapy (n = 5) and American Journal of Occupational Therapy (n = 3) (see Table 1 and Supplementary File 1). Four articles were published in OT Practice, a nonpeer-reviewed practice education magazine (Amini and Furniss, 2018; Deluliis, 2011; Mahoney, 2014; Whitney, 2019). Papers originated from 10 countries, with the majority originating in the United States of America (45%), Australia (22%) and the United Kingdom (11%). A variety of paper types were represented: interviews with no research element (52%), research (34%) and educational (14%). Of the research papers included in this review, mixed method approaches were most used (n = 11); quantitative methods were used in 10 papers and qualitative methods were employed in four. One study was a scoping review (Eschenfelder and Gavalas, 2018).

Table 1.

Summary of included papers.

Author, country	Journal	Description of paper	Definition of occupational profile provided by authors	Conceptualisation of occupational profile	Measures of occupational profile
American Occupational Therapy Association (2017), USA	AJOT	Practice education article	‘A summary of a client’s occupational history and experiences, patterns of daily living, interests, values, and needs’ (AOTA, 2014)	Occupational history and experiences, patterns of daily living, interests, values and needs	Structured and non-structured interview
American Occupational Therapy Association (2021), USA	AJOT	Practice education article	‘A summary of a client’s (person’s, group’s, or population’s) occupational history and experiences, patterns of daily living, interests, values, needs, and relevant contexts’ (AOTA, 2020: 21)	Reasons the client is seeking service, occupations in which the client is successful, barriers affecting success, occupational history, personal interests and values Personal and environmental contexts Performance patterns, habits, roles and rituals Client factors: values, beliefs, spirituality, body functions and body structures Client goals, occupational performance, prevention, health and wellness, quality of life, participation, role competence, wellbeing and occupational justice	Template that outlines information that should be gathered as part of a client’s occupational profile
Amini and Furniss (2018), USA	OT Practice	Continuing education article focusing on documentation of the occupational therapy process	Not defined	The profile provides a structured means for gathering info on goals, occupational history, information about life contexts and environments, performance skills and patterns and client factors that present as barriers or enablers to participation in occupation	Semi-structured interview Template that outlines information that should be gathered as part of a client’s occupational profile
Berg and LaVesser (2006), USA	OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health	Mixed methods study Pre-schoolers aged 3–6 years with disabilities	‘Occupational history and experiences, patterns of daily living, interests, values and needs’ (AOTA, 2002: 614)	Referred to as participation in everyday activities, engagement in life situations, activity patterns and individual profile of participation Conceptualised across six domains: Domestic life; self-care; mobility; major life areas: Education; interpersonal interactions and relationships; community, social and civic (leisure)	Parents completed two 24-h time logs in 30-min increments, one weekday and one weekend day
Bergin and Keegan (2016), UK	Irish Journal of Occupational Therapy	Mixed methods Children referred for primary occupational therapy	Not defined	Volition, habituation, motor skills, process skills, communication and interaction skills and environment	SCOPE
Bieber and Keller (2005), USA	Gerontology Special Interest Section Quarterly	Case study	‘Understanding of the client’s occupational history and experiences, patterns of daily living, interests, values and needs’ (AOTA, 2020: 21)	Remote occupations, current occupations, recent occupations and occupational performance	Allen cognitive level assessment
Bowyer et al. (2007), USA	Physical and Occupational Therapy in Paediatrics	Quantitative Many-faceted Rasch analysis Paediatric Clients (5 years old, neurological impairment)	Not defined	Volition, habituation and skills impacting occupational participation and environmental components	SCOPE
Bowyer et al. (2012), N/A	BJOT	Mixed methods study using focus groups and surveys	Not defined	An overview of child’s occupational function, environmental supports and hinders, child’s strengths, volition, habituation and performance capacity	SCOPE
Bridle (1978), Canada	CJOT	Project update of a study developing a profile of occupational therapists	Not defined	A set of competency skills for occupational therapists	Set of occupational therapy competency skills
Bridle (1981), Canada	CJOT	Quantitative study developing a profile of occupational therapists	Not defined	A set of competency skills for occupational therapists Job profile	Set of occupational therapy competency skills
Catalano (2017), USA	Not published in a journal article. This is a PhD thesis	Mixed methods study of at-risk youths	Not defined	Participation perception of performance participant goals and priorities, self-perception of strengths, barriers and environmental influences on performance, motivation for occupation, patterns of occupation, communication and interaction skills, process skills, motor skills, work-readiness skills, social participation, present role participation, role satisfaction and goals for future role participation	Standardised assessments: Occupational self-assessment, Kawa River Model, Model of Human Occupation Screening Tool, Double OT and Role Checklist Version 3 Non-standardised meeting notes observation
De Oliveira Coelho et al. (2020), Brazil	BJOT	Qualitative, action research study of adults hospitalised with communication limitations in ICU	Not defined	Where the client lives, marital status, cohabitation, visits and from whom, education, dominance, religion, occupation, assistive devices used and things clients’ like to do	Set of Alternative and Extended Communication (AEC) boards
Deluliis (2011), USA	OT Practice	Practice education article focusing on using the occupational profile for occupational therapy students	Not defined	Perceived strengths and areas of need, social roles, daily routines, habits and patterns of performance, interests and leisure pursuits, occupational balance, learning priorities, goals and motivation	Semi-structured interview
Emas et al. (2018), USA	Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics	Mixed method study of residents of gated retirement community aged 65 years	Not defined	Interests and hobbies	A mobile phone application
Ernest (1988), Canada	CJOT	Quantitative study providing a job profile of occupational therapists	Not defined	Consists of 219 representative functions and skills (Bridle, 1981). Each function is rated on a scale describing the expected level of skill of an entry level occupational therapist	List of 219 representative functions
Eschenfelder and Gavalas (2018), USA	Open Journal of Occupational Therapy	Scoping review	Summarises a client’s occupational history and experiences; patterns of daily living and engagement in occupations, interests, values and needs (AOTA, 2014)	Key component required for billing, a vital aspect of service delivery because of the need for interactive communication early on, important for guiding intervention and outcome planning, and modifiable	N/A
Fazio (1988), UK	Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics	Practice education article exploring sexuality as part of the occupational profile of older adults	Not defined	Occupational roles, leisure activities, self-care, daily living skills and sexuality	N/A
Girardi and Zywicka-Rospond (2020), UK	Occupational Therapy in Mental Health	Quantitative study of 18+ year old male patients of secure psychiatric hospital	Not defined	Activity participation, process skills, communication/interaction, life skills, role performance, balanced lifestyle, motivation, self-esteem and affect	Activity Participation Outcome Measure
Goffer et al. (2019), Israel	BJOT	Cross-sectional study of college students with and without ADHD	The occupational profile which maps out the client’s occupational engagement, and perceived ‘competence’, ‘enjoyment’ and ‘satisfaction’ in different domains: Daily living tasks, work and leisure (AOTA, 2014)	Informal studies, formal studies, work, daily living, leisure quiet, leisure active, leisure social, sleep, perceived competence, enjoyment and importance	Modified Occupational Questionnaire
Hitch (2017), AUS	JOS	Mixed method analysis exploring developing profiles of specific occupations	Not defined	A profile of an occupation doing, being, becoming, belonging and outcomes for health and wellbeing	N/A
Ikiugu et al. (2020), USA	Occupational Therapy in Mental	Mixed methods study on university staff and students	Not defined	Conceptualised as occupational priorities in 5 areas based on the AOTA Occupational Profile Interview. Occupational history, personal interests/values, performance patterns, supports/barriers to occupational performance and client goals. This is part of the OT Practice Framework (AOTA, 2014)	AOTA Occupational Profile Interview
Ioana et al. (2018), Romania	Journal of Physical Education and Sport	Quantitative study of general occupational therapy and physiotherapy clients	Not defined	Work activities, household activities, leisure activities, self-care activities, sleep-wake pace, physical effort, perceived rate of physical effort, satisfaction and performance in daily activities	Application on mobile phone device
Juan and Swinth (2010), USA	Journal of Occupation Therapy, Schools, Early Intervention	Case study of school students	Not defined	Client’s individual personality, interests, preferences, strengths, dreams and goals, likes, dislikes, fears and needs	The Person-centred Planning Process Non-structured interviews
Kashefimehr et al. (2018), Iran	OTJR: Occupation, Participation, and Health	Randomised control trial on children aged 3–8 years old diagnosed with ASD	Not defined	Participation levels, facilitators and barriers to participation, strengths and weaknesses in occupational performance SCOPE measures volition, habituation, interaction and communication skills, process skills, motor skills and environment	SCOPE
Kivnick and Stoffel (2005), USA	Journal of Gerontological Social Work	Practice education article focusing on Vital Involvement Practice with Older Adults	Not defined	Made up of three categories of occupations: Those I do, and I like to do Those I do not do, but would like to do Those I do, but I do not like to do, I do them only because I have to Indicates: strengths, interests, values, satisfaction, problems, and hopes, wishes, or dreams for the future	Semi-structured interview
Kramer et al. (2009), USA	OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health	Mixed methods study	Not defined	Volition, habituation, communication and interaction skills, process skills, motor skills and the environment and strengths and challenges that affect a child’s occupational participation	SCOPE
Lee et al. (2011), UK	BJOT	Retrospective study of patients from trusts in mental health 18–96 years	Patterns of occupational strengths and weaknesses in six specific areas of occupational participation	Volition, habituation, communication and interaction skills, process skills, motor skills and environmental influences	MOHOST
MacKinnon et al. (1994), Canada	International Journal of Rehabilitation Research	Case comparison study of adults with rheumatoid arthritis	Activities of daily living and leisure	Daily activities across full 24 h. While separated into many categories in measurement, findings are represented in terms of work, activities of daily living and leisure and, in some tables, with addition of rest and sleep	Daily occupational log that specified how they spent each hour of their time over 24 h for 7 consecutive days
Mahoney (2014), USA	OT Practice	Practice education article focusing on developing occupation profiles for younger children (3–5 years old)	The client’s patterns of occupations, values and interests, previous experiences, concerns related to engaging in occupation, successful occupations and perceived environmental supports and barriers (AOTA, 2014)	A child’s typical routine, what toys he or she likes to play with, who the child spends time with, what he or she likes to do and has difficulty doing	Semi-structured interviews Standardised assessments Paediatric Volitional Questionnaire and Paediatric Activity Card Sort
Metzinger and Berg (2015), USA	Work	Practice education article exploring work-readiness tools for young adults with chronic conditions	Not defined	Work goal, personal strengths, occupational history, short-term work goal, action plan and accountability partner	Template Informal conversation
Parkinson et al. (2012), UK	BJOT	Quantitative practice analysis of adult mental health services users’ clusters	Not defined	Volition, habituation, communication and interaction skills, process skills, motor skills and the environment	MOHOST
Pérez-de-Heredia-Torres et al. (2016), Spain	Occupational Therapy International	Cross-sectional study of women with fibromyalgia	Not defined	Levels of participation in daily occupations and impact on health and wellbeing Level of performance, links between impacted occupations and impact on quality of life	The Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire The Short Form 36 Functional Independence Measure Canadian Occupational Performance Measure
Whiteford and Wicks (1999), AUS	JOS	A mixed method reflective analysis exploring the occupational profiles published in the JOS	Not defined	The occupational dimension of peoples’ lives based on their own narrative accounts What, how, why and where people do what they do	Semi-structured interviews
Whiteford and Wicks (2000), AUS	JOS	Reflective analysis exploring the profiles published in the JOS. Group Occupational	Not defined	Occupational persona, Occupational environment, occupational engagement (strategies and process) and occupational outcomes	Semi-structured interview
Whitney (2019), USA	OT Practice	Practice education article on how occupational profile can be used in early intervention	Not defined	Client Report (reasons the client is seeking service, occupations in which the client is successful, barriers affecting success, occupational history, personal interests and values) Contexts (personal and environmental) Performance patterns (habits, routines, roles and rituals) Client factors (values, beliefs, spirituality, body functions and body structures) Client goals (occupational performance, prevention, health and wellness, quality of life, participation, role competence, wellbeing and occupational justice)	AOTA Occupational Profile template
Wong et al. (2018), USA	AJOT	Mixed methods grounded theory study of clients in post-acute care following hip fracture	Not defined	Emerged as a theme from focus groups exploring the integration of occupation in post-acute care Occupations person previously engaged in, what was meaningful to the person: habits, roles and routines prior to hip fracture Information then used to guide intervention	Discussion with client and family members

AJOT: American Journal of Occupational Therapy; ASD: Autism spectrum disorder; AUS: Australia; BJOT: British Journal of Occupational Therapy; CJOT: Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy; JOS: Journal of Occupational Science; MOHOST: Model of Human Occupation Screening Tool; OTJR: Occupational Therapy Journal of Research; SCOPE: Short Child Occupational Profile; USA: United States of America; UK: United Kingdom.

Definitions of occupational profile

As shown in Table 1, few studies (n = 9) provided definitions of occupational profile. The most frequently used was the definition provided by the AOTA (2002, 2014, 2020) (n = 7). One study referred to the Model of Human Occupation (Kielhofner 2002) as the theoretical underpinning for their definition (Lee et al., 2011). One study did not appear to draw from any citation in their provided definition (MacKinnon et al., 1994).

Of the papers that included definitions, over half (56%) included occupational history and experiences, values and interests (AOTA, 2017, 2021; Berg and LaVesser, 2006; Eschenfelder and Gavalas, 2018; Mahoney, 2014). The following terms were also included in the definitions: patterns of daily living (AOTA, 2017, 2021; Berg and LaVesser, 2006; Eschenfelder and Gavalas, 2018), engagement (Berg and LaVesser, 2006; Eschenfelder and Gavalas, 2018), work (Goffer et al., 2019; MacKinnon et al., 1994), leisure (Goffer et al., 2019; MacKinnon et al., 1994), strengths (Lee et al., 2011; Metzinger and Berg, 2015), weaknesses (Lee et al., 2011), environmental supports and barriers (Mahoney, 2014), enjoyment and satisfaction (Goffer et al., 2019).

Conceptualisation of occupational profile

The majority (94%) of papers conceptualised occupational profile as a profile of a client’s engagement in occupations. Three papers conceptualised the occupational profile to describe a job profile (Bridle, 1978; Bridle, 1981; Ernest, 1988). Hitch (2017) conceptualised occupational profile to describe the occupation of housework.

The terms used to describe occupational profile were categorised by the research team into nine concepts: (i) occupational engagement, (ii) occupational history and experiences, (iii) meaningful engagement, (iv) satisfaction, (v) motivation, (vi) occupational performance, (vii) values and preferences, (viii) performance patterns and (ix) environmental contexts (see Table 2). For example, satisfaction was categorised to quality of life, enjoyment, role, and occupational and life satisfaction as all terms related to some type of personal satisfaction.

Table 2.

Conceptualisation of the term occupational profile.

Concept	Terms used to describe concept	Number of papers referring to concept
Occupational engagement	Household activities	47
	Work
	Leisure
	Hobbies
	Self-care
	Daily living activities
	Participation levels
	Occupational balance
	Studying
	Recent occupations
Occupational history and experiences	Occupational history	45
	Experiences
	History of employment
	Occupational transition
	Remote occupations
Meaningful engagement	Meaning	35
Satisfaction	Quality of life	33
	Role satisfaction
	Occupational satisfaction
	Life satisfaction
	Enjoyment
Motivation	Motivation	33
Motivation	Volition	33
Occupational performance	Competence	18
	Strengths and weaknesses
	Function
	Motor skills
	Processing skills
	Life skills
	Communication and interactive skills
Values and preferences	Beliefs	18
	Interests
	Values
	Preferences
	Likes and dislikes
Performance patterns	Habituation	16
	Patterns of daily living
	Habits
	Routines
	Roles
Environmental contexts	Environmental influences	15

Papers included in the Journal of Occupational Science Occupational Profile Column series commonly explored occupational history and environmental influences by asking the interviewees to reflect on their life history, some childhood occupations and career transitions. An additional eight papers conceptualised occupational profile by describing motivation and occupational performance using the Model of Human Occupation (MOHO; Keilhofner, 2002) terminology (Bergin and Keegan, 2016; Bowyer et al., 2007; Bowyer et al., 2012; Kashefimehr et al., 2018; Kramer et al., 2009; Lee et al., 2011; Mahoney, 2014; Parkinson et al., 2012).

Individuals profiled

Most papers provided occupational profiles that explored multiple occupations of individual people or groups of individuals who shared commonalities including diagnoses, while others provided education on how to complete an occupational profile with different clients. The most common group of individuals profiled was children aged 3–8 years with various health conditions (Berg and LaVesser, 2006; Bergin and Keegan, 2016; Bowyer et al., 2007; Kashefimehr et al., 2018; Mahoney, 2014; Whitney, 2019) including autism spectrum disorder (Kashefimehr et al., 2018) and neurological impairments (Bowyer et al., 2007). Four papers profiled adults with mental health conditions (Catalano, 2017; Girardi and Zywicka-Rospond, 2020; Lee et al., 2011; Parkinson et al., 2012). Other groups of individuals profiled were adults with hip fractures (Wong et al., 2018), women with fibromyalgia (Pérez-de-Heredia-Torres et al., 2016), adults with rheumatoid arthritis (MacKinnon et al., 1994) and adults with communication limitations (De Oliveira Coelho et al., 2020).

The majority of papers (93%) exploring an occupational profile of individuals were published in the Journal of Occupational Science Occupational Profile Column series. The interviewees consisted of professors (Blair, 1997; Hocking, 2020; Thew, 2008), artists (Blijlevens, 2012; Knight, 2007; Meltzer, 2004a; Reed and Rawlings, 2014), occupational therapists (Boerema, 2006; Dickie, 2009; Meltzer, 2004b), band members (Copeland, 2013), a photographer (Hamburg and Meltzer, 2011), students (Martin, 2008; Reed, 2003), a member of the Royal Family (Stewart, 1998), a survivor of rape (Twinley, 2012), an engineer (Weston, 2000), politicians (Hocking, 1999; Whiteford, 1995), a cancer survivor (Wicks, 2000), a bookbinder (Wicks, 2005), a museum director (Yeager, 2005) and a stone carver (Christie, 2008). Other papers not included in the series were individual profiles of a 3-year-old with complex medical needs (Whitney, 2019), a school student (Juan and Swinth, 2010) and an older adult (Kivnick and Stoffel, 2005). Continuing practice education articles provided information on how to complete occupational profiles with a group of individuals based on commonalities such as student occupational therapists (Deluliis, 2011), older adults with chronic conditions (Kivnick and Stoffel, 2005), young adults with chronic conditions (Metzinger and Berg, 2015), school students (Juan and Swinth, 2010) and children (Bowyer et al., 2012; Mahoney, 2014).

Measurements of occupational profile

Several different approaches have been used to evaluate occupational profiles, including standardised and non-standardised approaches. The most commonly used standardised assessment was the Short Child Occupational Profile (SCOPE) (Bowyer et al., 2005). The SCOPE (Bowyer et al., 2005) is a measure for children and is based on the Model of Human Occupation (Kielhofner, 2002). Another standardised assessment used with paediatric clients was the Person Centred Planning Process (Cornwell University, n.d). Mahoney (2014) also suggested using the Paediatric Volition Questionnaire (Basu et al., 1998) and the Paediatric Activity Card Sort (Mandich et al., 2004) to measure occupational profiles of children.

The Activity Participation Outcome Measure (Casteleijn, 2011) was used in one study to measure the occupational profile of adult male psychiatric patients (Girardi and Zywicka-Rospond, 2020). Another study used the Occupational Self-Assessment (Baron et al., 2006), Double OT (Cyrs and Haworth, 2017), Role Checklist Version 3 (Scott et al., 2017) and Model of Human Occupation Screening Tool (MOHOST) (Parkinson et al., 2006) to measure the profile of at-risk young adults (Catalano, 2017). The MOHOST was also used with adults with mental health conditions in two other studies (Lee et al., 2011; Parkinson et al., 2012). One study used the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (Burckhardt et al., 1991), Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (McColl et al., 2005), Functional Independence Measure (State University of New York at Buffalo, 1993) and Short Form 36 (Ware and Sherbourne, 1992) together to measure the occupational profile of women with fibromyalgia (Pérez-de-Heredia-Torres et al., 2016). The Modified Occupational Questionnaire (Smith et al., 1986) was used to measure the occupational profile of college students with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (Goffer et al., 2019).

A variety of non-standardised measures have also been used to construct occupational profiles. The most commonly used related to the implementation of non-structured and semi-structured interviews. The AOTA Occupational Profile Template was mentioned in four papers to guide interviews (AOTA, 2017, 2021; Amini and Furniss, 2018; Whitney, 2019), while Metzinger and Berg (2015) provided their own template to gain information about the occupational profile of young adults with chronic conditions. Semi-structured methods were employed in the Journal of Occupational Science Occupational Profile Column series, in which the interviewer did not follow a formalised list of questions, instead, asking open-ended questions allowing for a discussion with the interviewee. Daily occupational logs were used in Berg and LaVesser’s (2006) study to measure the occupational profile of preschool students and in the MacKinnon et al. (1994) study to measure the profile of adults with rheumatoid arthritis.

Discussion

This scoping review explored the use of the term ‘occupational profile’ in occupational therapy and occupational science literature and revealed that the description of the term occupational profile is inconsistent in existing literature. Papers did not routinely include a definition of occupational profile, and the concepts considered to represent an occupational profile varied. Further, a range of approaches have been used to measure occupational profile.

It appears that the term ‘occupational profile’ lacks a universally agreed-upon definition, and its conceptualisation in the occupational therapy and occupational science literature varies. Despite three papers using the term ‘occupational profile’ prior, the earliest definition was provided by MacKinnon et al. (1994), whose study originated in Canada. No other included papers provided definitions of occupational profile until 2011 when Lee et al. (2011) defined occupational profile in relation to the MOHO (Keilhofner, 2002) six domains of occupational performance. Papers that defined occupational profile after this cited the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process (AOTA, 2002, 2014, 2020). Only one paper originated from outside the United States of America (USA). While there were similarities among definitions provided by included papers, there were also inconsistencies in specificity and terminology. This lack of clarity in articulating how occupational profile is defined reflects other recent studies which found inconsistencies in definitions and conceptualisations of other key occupational therapy terminology (Black et al., 2019; Walder et al., 2021). This lack of agreed-upon definition may be the reason for inconsistencies in how the term is conceptualised.

Conceptualisation of the term occupational profile varied, with papers describing job competencies, patterns of daily living, performance components and occupational history. Some briefly covered leisure occupations; however, self-care occupations were not explored. In fact, few papers explored comprehensive occupational profiles covering productivity, leisure and self-care occupations. This may have implications for occupational therapy practice as therapists may miss important aspects when developing a client’s occupational profile. Given the importance of consistent terminology in the occupational therapy profession (Creek and Lawson-Porter, 2010; Turner and Knight, 2015; Wilding and Whiteford, 2008), future research should develop a clear definition and conceptualisation of the term ‘occupational profile’. At the very least, future research should articulate definitions when exploring occupational profile in the absence of a universally agreed-upon definition and conceptualisation. This would provide greater clarity regarding the use of the term in research and professional practice and assist in developing instruments to accurately measure occupational profiles.

The findings from this review reveal that there are no commonly used tools to measure occupational profile. The lack of consistent measures may result from the lack of clear definitions and conceptualisation of the term; an assertion echoed in previous studies exploring occupational therapy terminology (Black et al., 2019; Grajo et al., 2018). AOTA (2017) created an occupational profile template in response to the American Medical Association (2016) Current Procedural Terminology Evaluation Codes which required occupational therapists to complete an occupational profile of clients for funding purposes. This was described in some included papers as a means of measuring the occupational profile of clients; however, this template does not capture a comprehensive occupational profile. The template fails to inform the user to address all aspects of occupation (self-care, leisure and productivity) and instead emphasises occupational performance components. The template also does not address occupational history or patterns of daily living, which are included components of the AOTA (2020) definition of occupational profile. Additionally, while this template suggests categories that may be included in the occupational profile, it does not recommend assessments for occupational therapists to gather such information. The only comprehensive assessment identified in this scoping review to measure occupational profile is the SCOPE (Bowyer et al., 2005) which was developed to measure the occupational profile of children. Without clear instruments to measure occupational profile, it is difficult to compare similarities and differences between individuals, groups and communities. The ability to review comparisons between individuals, groups and communities could assist in developing and implementing occupational therapy practice with these client groups. Future research should develop comprehensive assessments to measure the occupational profile of different client groups to provide greater clarity regarding the conceptualisation of the term in research and professional practice.

Published occupational profiles have typically explored individuals. As an example, the Journal of Occupational Science profiled individual adults with diverse career backgrounds who were well known in their field (Whiteford and Wicks, 1999). The focus of these profiles was on occupational transition in productive occupations. Other papers, not included in the Occupational Profile Column series, provided occupational profiles of children and an older adult with complex medical conditions. These profiles explored occupational performance and engagement. Papers in this review also profiled groups of individuals based on key characteristics, including mental health diagnoses and various medical conditions. Despite sources describing the term ‘client’ within the profession to include communities and populations (AOTA, 2020; World Federation of Occupational Therapists, 2012), no communities or populations were profiled in the included papers. Theoretically, profiling of communities and populations appears logical; however, the absence of literature may indicate a gap between knowledge and practice. It is plausible that inconsistent conceptualisation may hinder the development of clear profiles of these types of occupational therapy clients. This needs to be further explored to determine if there are differences in the occupational profile of communities and populations compared to individuals. Future research should explore the relevance of occupational profile concepts to communities and populations and develop suitable assessments if relevant. Exploring such profiles is important given contemporary occupational therapy practice includes communities and populations as clients in the occupational therapy process (AOTA, 2020; WFOT, 2012). This may then provide a greater understanding of these client types and the relevance of occupational therapy.

Despite the lack of definitions, conceptualisation and forms of measurement, the term ‘occupational profile’ is used widely in the occupational therapy profession. Occupational profiling allows occupational therapists and researchers to gather information about clients’ past and current occupational engagement, barriers and enablers to occupational engagement and assess whether occupational therapy input is necessary (AOTA, 2020). The findings from this review have highlighted the need for future development of how occupational therapy and occupational science conceptualise and define occupational profile as a term. The occupational therapy profession would benefit from future research clearly defining the term to reduce ambiguity and allow for consistency in practice. Future comprehensive assessments should be developed to explore the occupational profile of a diverse range of communities and populations. This would enable comparisons between individuals, groups and communities. Additionally, future research should focus on exploring occupational profiles of communities to establish potential occupational needs.

Limitations

Despite best efforts to identify all relevant data, there is a possibility that the search strategy does not identify every paper that would meet the inclusion criteria. Due to time and funding restraints, papers were excluded if they were not published in English; therefore, the majority of included papers originated in western countries. The authors acknowledge that the term ‘occupational profile’ may have a different meaning in other cultures and languages, and this may not be reflected in this review. Additionally, when authors of included papers did not provide a conceptualisation of occupational profile, the research team of this scoping review interpreted the conceptualisation. The authors acknowledge the subjective nature of the conceptualisation of included papers based on the research team’s perspective which, again, is situated within a western context. Thus, it could be conceptualised differently be other researchers.

Conclusion

This scoping review examined how the term ‘occupational profile’ was described in occupational therapy and occupational science literature by scoping definitions, conceptualisations and measures used. Findings indicated that there is a lack of definitions of occupational profile used in the literature. The conceptualisation of occupational profile mainly focused on engagement in productive and leisure occupations with a lack of self-care occupations. This scoping review highlighted that only individuals and groups are being profiled, not communities. Future research should develop a comprehensive assessment to measure the occupational profile across different populations and provide clear definitions of the term occupational profile.

Key findings

• The term ‘occupational profile’ is not consistently used or defined in literature.

• Individuals and groups have been profiled; however, there are no occupational profiles of communities or populations.

What the study has added

This review highlights the need for assessments designed to measure occupational profile as well as clear articulation of the conceptualisation of occupational profile in the absence of a universally agreed-upon definition.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - The use of the term ‘occupational profile’ in occupational therapy and occupational science literature: A scoping review

Supplemental Material for The use of the term ‘occupational profile’ in occupational therapy and occupational science literature: A scoping review by Chloe Hansell, Michelle Bissett, Anne-Maree Caine in British Journal of Occupational Therapy

Footnotes

Author contributions

MB and A-MC conceptualised this research. CH researched literature, conducted database searches and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors completed data analysis, reviewed and edited the manuscript and approved the final version.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Michelle Bissett

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

American Medical Association (2016) Current Procedural Terminology, CTP 2017. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association.

American Occupational Therapy Association (2002) Occupational therapy practice framework: domain and process. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy 56(6): 609–639.

American Occupational Therapy Association (2014) Occupational therapy practice framework: domain & process 3rd edition. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy 68(SI): S1–S48.

American Occupational Therapy Association (2017) AOTA occupational profile template. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy 71(2): 7112420030p1.

American Occupational Therapy Association (2020) Occupational therapy practice framework: domain and process fourth edition. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy 74(S2): 1–87.

American Occupational Therapy Association (2021) Improve your documentation and quality of care with AOTA's updated occupational profile template. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 75(2): 1–3.

Amini

Furniss

(2018) The occupational therapy practice framework: a foundation for documentation. OT Practice 23(18): 8.

Arksey

O’Malley

(2005) Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8(1): 19–32.

Backman

(2004) Occupational balance: exploring the relationships among daily occupations and their influence on well-being. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 71(4), 202–209.

10.

Baron

Kielhofner

Iyenger

, et al. (2006) Occupational Self Assessment (OSA). Chicago, IL: Model of Human Occupation Clearinghouse.

11.

Basu

Kalfkes

Schatz

, et al. (1998) Pediatric Volition Questionaire (PVQ). Chicago, IL: Model of Human Occupation Clearinghouse.

12.

Berg

LaVesser

(2006) The preschool activity card sort. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health 26(4): 143–151.

13.

Bergin

Keegan

(2016) Reflecting our scope: exploring the use of a theory driven initial assessment tool in primary care occupational therapy practice with children. Irish Journal of Occupational Therapy 44(2): 3–9.

14.

Bieber

Keller

(2005) Falls and the client with dementia: Using the occupational profile and Allen Cognitive Level to direct care. Gerontology Special Interest Section Quarterly 28(2): 1–3.

15.

Black

Milbourn

Desjardins

, et al. (2019) Understanding the meaning and use of occupational engagement: Findings from a scoping review. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 82(5): 272–287.

16.

Blair

(1997) Occupational profile: an interview with Professor Averil Stewart. Journal of Occupational Science 4(2): 75–78.

17.

Blijlevens

(2012) Occupational profile: an interview with Josie Martin from the Giant’s House. Journal of Occupational Science 19(3): 292–296.

18.

Boerema

(2006) Occupational profile: an interview with Barbara Lavin. Journal of Occupational Science 13(2): 158–161.

19.

Bowyer

Lee

Kramer

, et al. (2012) Determining the clinical utility of the Short Child Occupational Profile (SCOPE). British Journal of Occupational Therapy 75(1): 19–28.

20.

Bowyer

Ross

Schwartz

, et al. (2005) The Short Child Occupational Profile (SCOPE) (Version 2.0). Model of Human Occupational Clearninghouse.

21.

Bowyer

Kramer

Kielhofner

, et al. (2007) Measurement properties of the Short Child Occupational Profile (SCOPE). Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics 27(4): 67–85.

22.

Bridle

(1978) Profile of an occupational therapist: a report on the project to date. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 45(1): 23–26.

23.

Bridle

(1981) Profile of an cccupational therapist revisited. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 48(3): 107–113.

24.

Britton

Rosenwax

McNamara

(2015) Occupational therapy practice in acute physical hospital settings: Evidence from a scoping review. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal 62(6): 370–377.

25.

Burckhardt

Clark

Bennett

(1991) The fibromyalgia impact questionnaire: development and validation. The Journal of Rheumatology 18(5): 728–733.

26.

Casteleijn

(2011) User Manual. The Activity Participation Outcome Measure – APOM: A tool for occupational therapy clinicians in mental health practices. University of Pretoria.

27.

Catalano

(2017). Occupational Profiles of At-Risk Youth: A Multi-Case Study. PhD Thesis, Duquesne University. Available at: https://www-proquest-com-s.web.bisu.edu.cn/docview/2008137709?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=14543

28.

Christie

(2008) Occupational profile: an interview with Karin Sprague, stone carver. Journal of Occupational Science 15(1): 55–57.

29.

Copeland

(2013) Occupational profile: an interview with michel winter and Montana Kinunu from Staff Benda Bilili. Journal of Occupational Science 20(3): 278–282.

30.

Cornwell University (n.d.) Person Centered Planning Education Site. Available at: https://www.personcenteredplanning.org

31.

Creek

Lawson-Porter

(2010) The Core Concepts of Occupation Therapy: A Dynamic Framework for Practice, London; Philadelphia: Jessica Kingsley.

32.

Cyrs

Haworth

(2017) Double OT Assessment Recommendations Manual, Francisco, CA: Occupational Therapy Training Program.

33.

de Oliveira Coelho

do Valle

Pereira do Carmo

, et al. (2020) Systematization of procedures for the implementation of alternative and extended communication in a general ICU. Brazilian Journal of Occupational Therapy 28(3): 829–854.

34.

Deluliis

(2011) Using the occupational profile for student-centered fieldwork education. OT Practice 16(14): 13.

35.

Dickie

(2009) Occupational profile. Marga de Bruijn, mother/home maker, occupational therapist, quilt maker to quilt artist. Journal of Occupational Science 16(3): 208–212.

36.

Emas

Montoya

Chen

, et al. (2018) Empowering older adults: Incorporating technology for retirement adjustment. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics 36(2-3): 245–257.

37.

Ernest

(1988) Occupational therapy practice: generic or domain specific? Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 55(5): 249–254.

38.

Eschenfelder

Gavalas

Pendergast

, et al. (2018) Expressive art to facilitate the development of the occupational profile: a scoping review. Open Journal of Occupational Therapy 6(1): 1–16.

39.

Fazio

(1988) Sexuality and aging: a community wellness program. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Geriatrics 6(1): 59–69.

40.

Girardi

Zywicka-Rospond

(2020) Activity participation and inpatient violence in secure mental health. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health 36(4): 394–410.

41.

Goffer

Cohen

Berger

, et al. (2019) Beyond academic outcomes: occupational profile and quality of life among college students with and without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 82(3): 170–178.

42.

Grajo

Boisselle

DaLomba

(2018) Occupational adaptation as a construct: a scoping review of literature. The Open Journal of Occupational Therapy 6(1): 2.

43.

Hamburg

Meltzer

(2011) Occupational profile: an interview with Eric Hamburg. Journal of Occupational Science 18(2): 182–189.

44.

Hansson

Björklund Carlstedt

Morville

(2022) Occupational identity in occupational therapy: A concept analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 29(3), 198–209.

45.

Hitch

(2017) Keeping occupation front and centre to address the challenges of transcending the individual. Journal of Occupational Science 24(4): 494–509.

46.

Hocking

(1999) Occupational profile: an interview with the Honourable Peter McCardle, Associate Minister of Work and Income, New Zealand. Journal of Occupational Science 6(3): 136–139.

47.

Hocking

(2020) Occupational profile: an interview with Ann Allart Wilcock (née Ellison), PhD, GradDipPH, BAppScOT, FCOT. Journal of Occupational Science 27(1): 138–148.

48.

Ikiugu

Feldhacker

Lucas Molitor

(2020) Psychometric properties of the Meaningful and Psychologically Rewarding Occupation Rating Scale: A pilot study. Occupational Therapy in Mental Health 37: 72–86.

49.

Ioana

Mihaela

Mariana

, et al. (2018) The occupational diary as a smartphone application for monitoring the activities of daily living and physical exertion. Journal of Physical Education and Sport 18(1): 2008–2013.

50.

Juan

Swinth

(2010) As students become adults: The role of occupational therapy in the transition process. Journal of Occupational Therapy, Schools, and Early Intervention 3(3): 255–267.

51.

Kashefimehr

Kayihan

Huri

(2018) The effect of sensory integration therapy on occupational performance in children with autism. OTJR Occupation, Participation and Health 38(2): 75–83.

52.

Kearney

Laverdure

Dorsey

(2018) Guidelines for documentation of occupational therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 72(S2): S32–S38.

53.

Kielhofner

(2002) The Model of Human Occupation: Theory and Application. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

54.

Kivnick

Stoffel

(2005) Vital involvement practice: Strengths as more than tools for solving problems. Journal of Gerontological Social Work 46(2): 85–116.

55.

Knight

(2007) Occupational profile: an interview with David Prytherch. Journal of Occupational Science 14(1): 54–58.

56.

Kramer

Bowyer

Kielhofner

, et al. (2009) Examining rater behavior on a revised version of the Short Child Occupational Profile (SCOPE). OTJR: Occupation, Participation & Health 29(2): 88–96.

57.

Lee

Morley

Taylor

, et al. (2011) The development of care pathways and packages in mental health based on the Model of Human Occupation Screening Tool. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 74(6): 284–294.

58.

Levac

Colquhoun

O’brien

(2010) Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implemention Science 5(69): 1–9.

59.

MacKinnon

Avison

McCain

(1994) Pain and functional limitations in individuals with rheumatoid arthritis. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 17(1): 49–59.

60.

Mahoney

(2014) Erratum to: developing occupational profiles for younger children. OT Practice 19(17): 18.

61.

Mandich

Polatajko

Miller

, et al. (2004) Paediatric Activity Card Sort. Ottawa, ON: CAOT Publications.

62.

Martin

(2008) Occupational profile: An interview with Simone Foggo. Journal of Occupational Science 15(2): 117–119.

63.

McColl

Law

Baptiste

, et al. (2005) Targeted application of the Canadian occupational performance measure. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 72(5): 298–300.

64.

Meltzer

(2004a) Occupational profile: an interview with Adrian Saxe. Journal of Occupational Science 11(1): 40–44.

65.

Meltzer

(2004b) Occupational profile: an interview with Elizabeth Yerxa. Journal of Occupational Science 11(2): 80–84.

66.

Metzinger

Berg

(2015) Work readiness tools for young adults with chronic conditions. Work 52(3): 605–615.

67.

Moher

Liberati

Tetzlaff

, et al. (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Bmj: British Medical Journal 339(7716): 332–336.

68.

Molineux

(2017) A Dictionary of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

69.

Murray

Turpin

Edwards

, et al. (2015) A qualitative meta-synthesis about challenges experienced in occupational therapy practice. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 78(Generic): 534–546.

70.

Parkinson

Forsyth

Kielhofner

(2006) The Model of Human Occupation Screen Tool (MOHOST) Version 2.0. Chicago, IL: The University of Illinois at Chicago.

71.

Parkinson

Morley

Stewart

, et al. (2012) Meeting the occupational needs of mental health service users: Indicative care packages and actual practice. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 75(8): 384–389.

72.

Pérez-de-Heredia-Torres

Huertas Hoyas

Sánchez-Camarero

, et al. (2016) The occupational profile of women with fibromyalgia syndrome. Occupational Therapy International 23(2): 132–142.

73.

Radomski

Latham

(2014) Occupational Therapy for Physical Dysfunction. Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.

74.

Reed

(2003) Occupational profile: an interview with Gabrielle Sherry. Journal of Occupational Science 10(2): 107–110.

75.

Reed

Rawlings

(2014) Occupational profile: an interview with artist, George Mitchell: continuing the dream after 13 years. Journal of Occupational Science 21(4): 527–531.

76.

Scott

Mckinney

Perron

(2017) Measurement of participation: The Role Check List Version 3: Satisfaction and performance. In: Huri

(ed) Occupational Therapy: Occupation Focused Holistic Practice in Rehabilitation. Croatia: InTechOpen.

77.

Smith

Kielhofner

Watts

(1986) The relationships between volition, activity pattern, and life satisfaction in the elderly. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 40(4): 278–283.

78.

State University of New York at Buffalo (1993) Guide for the Uniform Data Set for Medical Rehabilitation (Adult FIM). Version 4.0. New York, NY: State University of New York at Buffalo.

79.

Stewart

(1998) Occupational profile: an interview with Her Royal Highness The Princess Royal. Journal of Occupational Science 5(2): 93–95.

80.

Thew

(2008) Occupational profile: an interview with Professor Gary Craig. Journal of Occupational Science 15(3): 181–185.

81.

Turner

Knight

(2015) A debate on the professional identity of occupational therapists. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 78(11): 664–673.

82.

Twinley

(2012) Occupational profile: an interview with ‘Lucy’: A survivor of woman-to-woman rape. Journal of Occupational Science 19(2): 191–195.

83.

Veritas Health Innovation (2021) ‘Covidence’ software. Melbourne https://www.covidence.org/

84.

Wagman

Håkansson

Björklund

(2012) Occupational balance as used in occupational therapy: a concept analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 19(4): 322–327.

85.

Walder

Molineux

Bissett

, et al. (2021) Occupational adaptation - Analyzing the maturity and understanding of the concept through concept analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Occupational Therapy 28(1): 26–40.

86.

Ware

Sherbourne

(1992) The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Medical Care 30: 473–483.

87.

Weston

(2000) Occupational profile: an interview with John Kozlows. Journal of Occupational Science 7(1): 38–41.

88.

Whiteford

(1995) Occupational profile: an interview with David Lange, M. P. for Mangere. Journal of Occupational Science 2(2): 74–78.

89.

Whiteford

Wicks

(1999) Doing, being, reflecting: An analytic review of the journal of occupational science profiles. Part 1. Journal of Occupational Science 6(3): 131–135.

90.

Whiteford

Wicks

(2000) Occupation: persona, environment, engagement and outcomes. An analytic review of the journal of occupational science profiles. Part 2. Journal of Occupational Science 7(2): 48–57.

91.

Whitney

(2019) The occupational profile as a guide to clinical reasoning in early intervention: a detective’s tale. OT Practice 24(4): 31–31.

92.

Wicks

(2000) Occupational profile: an interview with Samantha Miles. Journal of Occupational Science 7(2): 80–83.

93.

Wicks

(2005) Occupational profile: an interview with Lou Klauser. Journal of Occupational Science 12(1): 45–50.

94.

Wilcock

(2001) Occupational science: the key to broadening horizons. The British Journal of Occupational Therapy 64(8): 412–417.

95.

Wilding

Whiteford

(2008) Language, identity and representation: Occupation and occupational therapy in acute settings. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal 55(3): 180–187.

96.

Wong

Fagan

Leland

(2018) Occupational therapy practitioners’ perspectives on occupation-based interventions for clients with hip fracture. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 72(4): 7204205050p1.

97.

World Federation of Occupational Therapists . (2012) Definition of occupational therapy. Available at: http://www.wfot.org/AboutUs/AboutOccupationalTherapy/DefinitionofOccupationalTherapy

98.

Yeager

(2005) Occupational profile: an interview with Rebecca Hoffberger. Journal of Occupational Science 12(3): 184–188.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.32 MB