Talk:Occupational therapy/Archive 3

Other areas that need attention
The statement that primary source materials are not available about the founders is not accurate. The Archives of the American Occupational Therapy Association, curated in the Wilma West Library of the American Occupational Therapy Foundation, have many original source materials.

Writers should avoid making reference to a specific model or framework since doing so creates subjective bias. For example, the Canadian Model of Occupational Performance is not the only occupational performance model that has been published and studied. An accurate entry would make reference to several models.

In general, authors contributing should take care to assure that their entries are objective and neutral, complete, and accurate, as documented through relevant citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ccxsen (talk • contribs) 23:33, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

confusing first sentence should be rewritten
The first sentence of this article reads, "Occupational Therapy, often abbreviated as 'OT', incorporates meaningful and purposeful occupation to enable people with limitations or impairments to participate in everyday life."

That's a terrible sentence. It uses the word "occupation" to define the term "occupational therapy." Definitions should not be self-referential. I came to this page having no idea what OT therapy is, and after reading that first sentence I still had no idea what it is. In what sense is the word "occupation" being used? What does "meaningful and purposeful occupation" mean? If a reader is left confused by the first sentence, s/he might not stick around to read the whole article (I certainly didn't). A helpful encyclopedia article will be easily accessible from the outset with clearly defined terms; this way people who just want a quick answer can read the initial blurb, while those seeking more in-depth information can continue to read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.31.246 (talk) 16:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I came across this potentially misleading sentence: "Occupational therapy is basically used for the people who are having an issue related to health because of their profession" While this may be true of some people who receive occupational therapy, it is certainly not definitive of the profession, as this statements suggests. For example, a 3 year old receiving OT most definitely has not sustained health issues as a result of their "profession". This statement perpetuates the widespread societal misconception of what OT actually is, that it pertains to the workplace, which is mistaken. In fact "occupation" in occupational therapy is meant in the broader sense of the word, and applies to anything a person may do to occupy themselves, especially those things that are meaningful, which could include anything from getting dressed, to eating dinner, to going to the movies, to going for a walk, to playing a musical instrument, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.181.121.190 (talk) 22:29, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality
This article reads like an advert for OT. Potential downsides or controversies surrounding OT are not mentioned at any point in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fennspoon (talk • contribs) 10:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I am unaware of any Potential downsides or controversies surrounding OT. that is not to say they don't exist but the absence might indicate that there are little or no such conflicts surrounding OT. If you can find them please add them. --Lord Matt (talk) 17:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As this dispute is now 5 months old without attracting further discussion I suggest we consider removing the dispute banner in the near future. --Lord Matt (talk) 09:11, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have added well-sourced material about massive, unnecessary over-treatment by OTs in parts of South Africa. That should add some balance. Park3r (talk) 14:08, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

OT Student Group
Hello,

We are a student group in the occupational therapy program at Xavier University in Cincinnati, OH. We have been asked to complete a scholarly project that contributes to our profession and we were wondering if we could help out by working to improve this Occupational therapy page. Specifically, we were thinking that we could help by inserting more references and tightening the information to make it more concise and accessible to the general population. From looking at the edit page, it seems that people have already created a plan of what needs to be done so we want to make sure that we are not making changes that do not align with what other people wanted for the page. Could you please let us know how we can help you best? We look forward to working together!

Thank you.

--MuskiePride (talk) 18:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello again,

From looking at the talk page and the actual occupational therapy page we have created an outline of some changes that we would like to make to the page. I think overall we are thinking that simplifying and cutting down some of the material would be the most beneficial action at this point. The following is what we propose to do:

- streamline the introduction - rearrange and cut down material under practice areas (perhaps under headings from AOTA) - add section on emerging practice areas in the profession

Please let us know what you think about these proposed changes.

Thanks, MuskiePride (talk) 21:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi again,

Just made our changes to the introduction of the page. I tried to maintain the ideas from the original paragraph and simply re-worded or re-organized it. I also added citations to strengthen the validity of the statements. I have kept the original paragraph so if others disagree with the edit I can always insert the old one. I welcome any feedback, just let me know. I am going to continue to make some other changes to try and streamline the page more but always feel free to disagree.

Thanks, MuskiePride (talk) 04:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Just made our final changes to the page by streamlining the practice areas section. I didn't remove any of the main ideas so hopefully no one will object. Feel free to make changes as usual or talk to me about it. But I was thinking less is more for this section.

Thanks, MuskiePride (talk) 04:17, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

An idea evolves a discipline develops
I have just made a tiny looking edit that has a lot of thought behind it. Just doing my bit towards better reading ease--Lord Matt (talk) 17:54, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Travel Occupational Therapy
Since this is an large and growing field, I've included a brief section describing and defining it. Please take a look and help me refine this -- I'm still pretty new to Wikipedia. LaesaMajestas (talk) 16:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Assessment section
I removed a section that went into great detail about specific assessments that therapists may use. This appears to be too detailed and jargony to be useful as for a general use encyclopedia, so I removed it. Yobol (talk) 18:14, 18 November 2014 (UTC)