Standing on the Precipice: Evaluating Final-Year Physiotherapy Students' Perspectives of Their Curriculum as Preparation for Primary Health Care Practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To explore final-year physiotherapy students' perceptions of primary health care practice to determine (1) aspects of their curriculum that support their learning, (2) deficiencies in their curriculum, and (3) areas that they believe should be changed to adequately equip them to make the transition from student to primary health care professional. Methods: Framework analysis methodology was used to analyze group opinion obtained using structured group feedback sessions. Sixty-eight final-year physiotherapy students from the four higher education institutions in Ireland participated. Results: The students identified several key areas that (1) supported their learning (exposure to evidence-based practice, opportunities to practise with problem-based learning, and interdisciplinary learning experiences); (2) were deficient (primary health care placements, additional active learning sessions, and further education and practice opportunities for communication and health promotion), and (3) required change (practice placements in primary health care, better curriculum organization to accommodate primary health care throughout the programme with the suggestion of a specific primary health care module). Conclusion: This study provides important insights into physiotherapy students' perceptions of primary health care. It also provides important indicators of the curriculum changes needed to increase graduates' confidence in their ability to take up employment in primary health care.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".