Study on the History of Korean Physical Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since physical therapy was first introduced in Korea, it has been 50 years past and Korean physical therapy has made rapid progress. However, history or educational system of Korean physical therapy is still not known worldwide. Now, for Korean physical therapy to go beyond Asia and leap toward the world, endless studies, efforts and publicity are required. Korean physical therapy first began by missionaries dispatched from other countries like America and Canada with Korean War, which occurred in 1950. After the War, Korean Physical Therapy is developed very fast. Korean Physical Therapy Association was founded in October 1, 1965 and many physical therapist were discharged. Korea became a full member of World Confederation of Physical Therapy(WCPT) in 1974, and held the 2nd Asia Pacific Confederation of Physical Therapy assembly in 1984 and WCPT assembly in 2005. Today, in 2010, licensed physical therapists are about 35,000 and there are physical therapy departments in 74 universities, and 17 universities have master`s or doctor`s degree courses. And there are many academic journals(more than 10) related to physical therapy that are published. Many Korean physical therapists are working at various countries like America or Australia, and are acknowledged with excellent treatment technology and academic studies. This thesis aims to shed new light to the history and educational system reorganization of Korean physical therapy and introduce it to the world, and establish the historical foundation to develop Korean physical therapy into the international level.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".