Perceptions of Outpatients Regarding the Attire of Physiotherapists
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study investigated perceptions of patients regarding physiotherapists' attire. METHODS: Three hundred patients in three publicly funded outpatient physiotherapy clinics were asked to complete a questionnaire, ranking four photographed modes of attire (lab coat, tailored dress, "scrubs," and jeans) in terms of professionalism, preference, and appropriateness and rating their level of agreement with four statements about physiotherapists' attire. RESULTS: Response rate was 63.7 %. The lab coat was ranked most professional, tailored dress most preferred, and jeans least professional and least preferred. Although jeans were deemed inappropriate (p < 0.001), strong support was shown for wearing jeans on "casual day" (p = 0.001). Age of respondents influenced the perception of the appropriateness of wearing jeans (p = 0.007 for male therapist; p = 0.017 for female therapist); only the cohort <36 years considered jeans appropriate apparel. Overall exposure to physiotherapists (number of lifetime visits) affected patients' perceptions of the importance of attire (p = 0.039) and the appropriateness of wearing jeans (p = 0.018): as number of visits increased, perceived importance decreased and perceived propriety of jeans increased. CONCLUSION: The findings of this study, the first to examine patients' opinions of physiotherapists' attire, suggest that outpatients made clear distinctions between what they perceived as professional and what they preferred, as well as between the appropriateness of physiotherapists' wearing jeans in general and the appropriateness of their doing so on "casual day." Age and exposure to physiotherapists influenced patients' perceptions of attire.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it