MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2928636797 · doi:10.2196/12795

Evidence-Based Physical Therapy Practice in the State of Kuwait: A Survey of Attitudes, Beliefs, Knowledge, Skills, and Barriers

2019· article· en· W2928636797 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hesham N. Alrowayeh, Ali Jasem Buabbas, Talal A. Alshatti, Jawad Abulhasan

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Medical Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Sciences Research and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDescriptive statisticsEvidence-based practiceMedical educationLogistic regressionPopulationPsychologyMedicineAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based practice (EBP) is necessary to improve the practice of physical therapy. However, a lack of knowledge and skills among physical therapists and the presence of barriers may hinder the implementation of EBP in the State of Kuwait. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this study were to extensively (1) investigate attitudes toward EBP, (2) assess the current level of knowledge and skills necessary for EBP, and (3) identify the barriers to EBP among physical therapists in the State of Kuwait. METHODS: The following methods were used: (1) a previously validated self-reported questionnaire and (2) a face-to-face semistructured interview. The questionnaire, which was distributed to 200 physical therapists, examined the attitudes and beliefs of physical therapists about EBP; the interest in and motivation to engage in EBP; educational background, knowledge, and skills related to accessing and interpreting information; the level of attention to and use of the literature; access to and availability of information to promote EBP; and the perceived barriers to using EBP. The interview explored the factors that promote or discourage EBP. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression analyses were used. RESULTS: Of the 200 nonrandomly distributed questionnaires, 92% (184/200) were completed and returned. In general, the physical therapists had positive attitudes, beliefs, and interests in EBP. Their educational background, knowledge, and skills related to assessing and interpreting information were well-founded. The top 3 barriers included insufficient time (59.2%, 109/184), lack of information resources (49.4%, 91/184), and inapplicability of the research findings to the patient population (40.7%, 75/184). CONCLUSIONS: EBP lacks support from superiors at work. Thus, identifying methods and strategies to support physical therapists in adopting EBP in the State of Kuwait is necessary.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.104

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.449 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Medical EducationSame topicHealth Sciences Research and EducationFrench-language works237,207