MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138766246 · doi:10.1016/j.physio.2021.03.008

Accreditation of advanced clinical practice of musculoskeletal physiotherapy in England: a qualitative two-phase study to inform implementation

2021· article· en· W3138766246 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiotherapy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicNursing Roles and Practices
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersLondon and South East Postgraduate Medical and Dental Education
KeywordsFocus groupAccreditationThematic analysisMedicineQualitative researchMedical educationPhysical therapyNursingSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To establish whether international musculoskeletal physiotherapy educational standards and associated governance framework align with advanced clinical practice (ACP) frameworks in England; and to evaluate physiotherapy stakeholders' perceptions about potential accreditation and governance of ACP for musculoskeletal physiotherapists. DESIGN: A qualitative two-phase study. 1] An explicit documentary mapping process of established international educational musculoskeletal standards to the ACP frameworks for England, in terms of domains, standards and competencies by two independent reviewers. Results were evaluated by a third reviewer and focus group participants. 2] Focus groups enabled maximal insight into perceptions of musculoskeletal stakeholders through the interactive process facilitated by a topic guide. Groups were recorded and transcribed verbatim; data were analysed using thematic coding. SETTING: Three focus groups in London, Birmingham and Manchester facilitated recruitment from all regions of England. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sampling (n=26) ensured representation of stakeholders for ACP (e.g. Professional Networks, patients). RESULTS: International educational standards fully mapped to both ACP frameworks, with 100% saturation of defined capabilities, and agreement across reviewers and focus groups. Four themes were identified from focus groups: musculoskeletal physiotherapy specific professional factors; fit for purpose, innovative educational opportunities; advocated recognition of musculoskeletal physiotherapy ACP as a discrete professional practice field; and advocating a potential vehicle for musculoskeletal physiotherapy ACP. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies the importance of musculoskeletal ACP specific to the physiotherapy profession. Fit-for-purpose innovative educational opportunities for musculoskeletal physiotherapists are required at Masters level to support preparation for ACP roles. The established national and international musculoskeletal frameworks afford an opportunity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.770

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.648
Teacher spread0.570 · 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