Exploring the Concept of Leadership from the Perspective of Physical Therapists in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To explore the concept of leadership from the perspective of physical therapists in Canada. METHODS: A quantitative, cross-sectional nationwide study was performed using a Web-based survey distributed to all members of the Canadian Physiotherapy Association (CPA) with a registered e-mail address (n=6,156). Frequency distributions and percentages were obtained for all leadership characteristics, and chi-square tests were performed, with significance set at p<0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1,875 members responded, for a 30% response rate. Communication, professionalism, and credibility were rated as extremely important leadership characteristics by the majority of respondents across all three settings (workplace, health care system, and society); practising in the private sector contributed significantly to the perceived importance of business acumen (p<0.001). Overall, 79.6% of respondents self-declared as leaders; male gender, primary work facility in private practice or educational institution, and supervision of students were factors associated with self-declaration as a leader. CONCLUSIONS: The top three characteristics that physical therapists perceive as important differ from those reported among other health care professions. Further research is required to understand whether the presence of multiple health care professionals in an acute-care setting facilitates leadership opportunities or whether physical therapists feel overshadowed. Future studies should also investigate whether individuals practising outside the private sector recognize the business aspects of their workplace.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".