MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895906460 · doi:10.1080/09593985.2018.1488192

Integration of behavioral medicine competencies into physiotherapy curriculum in an exemplary Swedish program: rationale, process, and review

2018· article· en· W2895906460 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Sandborgh, Elizabeth Dean, Eva Denison, Maria Elvén, Johanna Fritz, Petra von Heideken Wågert, Johan Moberg, Thomas Overmeer, Åsa Snöljung, Ann‐Christin Johansson, Anne Söderlund

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiotherapy Theory and Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccreditationCurriculumMedical educationScope (computer science)Scope of practiceMedicineFunction (biology)Best practicePsychologyEntry LevelHealth carePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2004, Mälardalen University, Sweden, introduced a new undergraduate entry-level physiotherapy program. Program developers constructed the curriculum with behavioral medicine content that reflected the contemporary definition and values of the physiotherapy profession aligning it with current best practices, evidence, and the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). The new curriculum conceptualized movement and function as modifiable behaviors in that they reflect behavioral contingencies, perceptions, beliefs, and lifestyle factors as well as pathophysiology and environmental factors. The purpose of this article is to describe how one university accordingly structured its new curriculum and its review. We describe the rationale for the curriculum's behavioral medicine content and competencies, its development and implementation, challenges, long-term outcomes, and its related research enterprise. We conclude that physiotherapy practiced by our graduates augments that taught in other programs based on accreditation reviews. With their expanded practice scope, graduates are systematically practicing within the constructs of health and function conceptualized within the ICF. Our intent in sharing our experience is to exemplify one university's initiative to best prepare students with respect to maximizing physiotherapy outcomes as well as establish a dialogue regarding minimum standards of behavioral medicine competencies in physiotherapy education and practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.395 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiotherapy Theory and PracticeSame topicCerebral Palsy and Movement DisordersFrench-language works237,207