Physical Therapists' Perceptions of Leadership across the Health Care Continuum: A Brief Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe and compare Canadian physical therapists' perspectives on the importance of characteristics required for leadership in the workplace and in society and to explore the implications for the profession. METHODS: This quantitative, cross-sectional study used a web-based survey of members of the Canadian Physiotherapy Association (CPA) with a registered email address (n=6156). The perceived importance of leadership characteristics at the workplace level versus the societal level was examined using a Mann-Whitney U test, with the significance set at α=0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1,511 respondents completed the questionnaire for a 24.5% response rate; they rated communication, professionalism, and credibility as the most important characteristics. For each of the 15 leadership characteristics, significantly fewer physical therapists chose the rating "extremely important" at the societal level than did so at the workplace level (p<0.001 for all characteristics). CONCLUSIONS: Physical therapists consistently rate leadership characteristics as more important in the workplace than at the societal level. Future research should aim to guide understanding about the reasons for this difference in perceived importance of leadership characteristics across different contexts.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".