MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4407237534 · doi:10.11124/jbies-24-00122

Global status of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications: a scoping review

2025· review· en· W4407237534 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Claire Johnson, Bart N. Green, Lyndon Amorin-Woods, Ilija Arar, Kara D. Burnham, David Byfield, Joel Carmichael, Waleska Crespo, Philip Dewhurst, Chantal Doucet, Marina Fox, Navine Haworth, Adrian Hunnisett, Russ Iwami, Amanda R Jones-Harris, Carolina Kolberg, Charmaine Korporaal, Craig S. Little, Celia P. Maguire, Kevin S. Mathers, John P. Mrozek, Sharné Naidoo, Robert M. Rowell, Gary D. Schultz, Gregory J. Snow, Stephanie Sullivan, Krista L. Ward, Stephney Whillier, David Wickes, Yi Kai Wong, Christopher Yelverton

Notice bibliographique

RevueJBI Evidence Synthesis · 2025
Typereview
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Établissements canadiensCanadian Memorial Chiropractic CollegeUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Organismes subventionnairesDurban University of Technology
Mots-clésChiropracticCINAHLMedical educationSystematic reviewAlternative medicineScopusWeb of scienceMedicineMEDLINEPolitical scienceMeta-analysisPsychological interventionNursing

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to map the volume (number of studies) and nature (topics and designs) of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications on chiropractic learners and programs worldwide. INTRODUCTION: Despite the expansion of the chiropractic profession and its recognition by entities such as the World Health Organization, a gap exists in comprehending the international landscape of chiropractic education. No prior studies have systematically mapped the volume and nature of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications. A scoping review of chiropractic education research and scholarly publications is needed to guide future policy development, research agendas, and educational initiatives within the chiropractic profession. INCLUSION CRITERIA: Publications in the indexed literature on chiropractic students, graduates, academics, and programs in any chiropractic education setting were included. Studies focused on chiropractic programs and education for chiropractic students or chiropractors worldwide were considered for inclusion. All research designs, literature reviews, descriptive studies, and commentaries were included. METHODS: This scoping review was conducted according to JBI methodology for scoping reviews and was reported in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The databases PubMed (NLM), Scopus, CINAHL via EBSCOhost, Index to Chiropractic Literature, Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde, and Educational Resources Information Center were searched from their inception to November 5 and 6, 2023, with no language limits. Data were extracted for primary topics, study designs, and regions of the included documents and entered in Covidence by paired independent reviewers. The findings were organized into figures and tables with a narrative description. RESULTS: The search identified 7494 documents. After deduplication, 5041 were screened for relevance, of which 667 were selected for full-text review. From these, 598 were selected for data extraction. The chiropractic education topics included values/ethical competence (n=3), personal/behavioral competence (n=34), knowledge and cognitive competence (n=49), functional and clinical competence (n=93), and program-relevant research (n=419). Most designs were quantitative (n=391), followed by descriptive reports (n=91), qualitative (n=43), mixed methods (n=40), commentaries (n=22), and literature reviews (n=11). Chiropractic education was most studied in the United States (n=359), Australia (n=116), and Canada (n=106). CONCLUSIONS: This scoping review reports the volume and nature of indexed publications relating to chiropractic learners and programs worldwide. This body of literature contains learner competencies in knowledge, skills, and attitudes, as well as studies about chiropractic programs. The increasing number of publications and proportion of study designs over time show that chiropractic scholars and programs are engaged in collecting, analyzing, and distributing data relevant to education and training. The map of professional competencies in the chiropractic education literature shows that the profession possesses the fundamental traits needed to contribute to the global health care workforce. REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework https://osf.io/9b3ap. SUPPLEMENTAL DIGITAL CONTENT: French- [ http://links.lww.com/SRX/A94 ], Spanish- [ http://links.lww.com/SRX/A93 ] Mandarin- [ http://links.lww.com/SRX/A87 ], Portuguese- [ http://links.lww.com/SRX/A88 ], Malaysian- [ http://links.lww.com/SRX/A90 ], and Welsh-language [ http://links.lww.com/SRX/A89 ] translations of the abstract are available.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,128
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,545
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,996

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,128
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,099
Tête enseignante GPT0,501
Écart entre enseignants0,402 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2025
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJBI Evidence SynthesisMême sujetMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationTravaux en français237 207