<i>What place for ethics?</i>An overview of ethics teaching in occupational therapy and physiotherapy programs in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The recent introduction of master's level curricula for Occupational Therapy (OT) and Physiotherapy (PT) training programs in Canada raises both challenges and opportunities to address ethical issues during professional training. This study evaluated the inclusion of ethics content in course descriptions and course calendars in order to develop a preliminary understanding of how rehabilitation ethics is taught in Canadian universities. METHOD: We reviewed the ethics content in the online curricula of 27 Canadian rehabilitation programs (OT & PT). Courses addressing ethical issues were identified through keyword searches, and were then subjected to both quantitative and textual descriptive analyses. RESULTS: The mean proportion of credits allotted to courses that included ethics terminology was 5.9% (SD = 1.4) for OT and 6.5% (SD = 4.8) for PT (p = 0.69). The most common terms in the course descriptions were "ethics/ethical" followed by "legal", "professionalism", "deontology" and "regulatory". Textual analysis revealed eight course topics, the most frequent being: standards of practice, ethical decision-making, clinical courses and mediation/communication. CONCLUSION: With the growing recognition and status of OT and PT in the healthcare system, and corresponding shifts in how professionals are being trained, it is crucial to assess and reflect upon the place accorded to and manner of teaching ethics. Implications for Rehabilitation Ethics training in rehabilitation programs With the evolving recognition of OT and PT professions within the healthcare system, and corresponding shifts in how future professionals are trained, it is crucial to assess the place accorded to teaching ethics. In Canadian OT and PT programs, ethics content is most commonly included in broad courses related to standards of practice and not in specific ethics courses. Careful attention is needed to ensure that OT and PT students receive sufficient ethics training that is well aligned with their future practice context to support them to competently address the ethical issues that they will encounter in clinical practice. In addition, OT and PT professionals would benefit from the development of continuing education activities that target ethical issues relevant to their practice.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".