A qualitative study of health professions curricula and management of lateral ankle ligament sprain demonstrates inconsistency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health educators aim to graduate students who are safe, effective and practice evidence-based medicine (EBM). Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPGs) are tools for translating evidence into clinical practice for health professionals and educators who lack time to appraise the evidence. There have been CPGs published for lateral ankle ligament sprains (LALS) for physiotherapists, nurses, and doctors. Clinical decision rules have also been developed for LALS to increase the safety of practice. The Ottawa Ankle Rules (OAR) were developed to screen for the need for an x-ray following an ankle or foot injury. METHODS: Educators from the Australasian College of Sports and Exercise Physicians (ACSEP), St John Ambulance first aiders, pharmacy, nursing, and physiotherapy disciplines were participants in this study. Using purposeful sampling with semi-structured questions and a LALS case study, 19 Australian educators were interviewed. Curricula and textbooks were also collected and analysed. Two researchers independently analysed the data using a deductive method. RESULTS: Analysis found that no educator used a CPG to inform their teaching. There was no common LALS curriculum for the five groups studied. There were two approaches: a triage curriculum (St John Ambulance, pharmacy, nursing) and a reflective curriculum (ASCEP and physiotherapy). Textbooks influenced curriculum for physiotherapy, pharmacy and first aid educators. The triage curricula recommend rest, ice, compression and elevation (RICE) alone, while the reflective curricula uses OAR, RICE, immobilisation if the LALS is severe, functional support (brace), exercises and manual therapy. In addition, ACSEP and physiotherapy do not recommend electrotherapy. All five groups were cautious about the use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). CONCLUSIONS: Physiotherapy and ACSEP educators teach OAR. Despite not using the CPGs to inform curriculum, physiotherapy and ACSEP have unintentionally aligned their curriculum with current LALS CPG recommendations. However, nursing, pharmacy and first aid trainers are not teaching OAR or aligned with LALS CPGs. Educators in pharmacy, nursing and first aid should re-examine their curricula and consider possibly teaching OAR and using CPG. Clinical practice guideline developers should consider pharmacists and first aiders as users of their LALS CPGs.
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 | 0.025 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".