Trends of Publication in the Education and Practice Sections of the IJTMB: A Call to Action
Bibliographic record
Abstract
includes not only publishing scientific research studies, but also to publish education innovation and practice-oriented approaches for all allied health providers whose practice include manually applied therapeutic massage and bodywork. The aims of the Practice and Education sections of the Journal are described in this editorial. The Education section covers topics including curriculum and competencies development, instructional design and delivery, instructional technology, distance learning, and testing/evaluative procedures for both initial education as well as continuing education. Planning, organization, marketing, and management of a successful practice, the incorporation of new scientific findings and methods into clinical practice, new clinical approaches to prevention and treatment of specific health conditions, and ethical issues are included in the Practice section. In an effort to increase publication within these sections we have put forth this call to action. We invite educators and practitioners to submit manuscripts discussing innovations in massage therapy education, how schools and students dealt with the Covid-19 pandemic, practitioners and clients adapted to the pandemic, investigations of the massage therapy profession and about massage therapists, as well as interesting case studies.
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 | 0.132 | 0.292 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.042 | 0.031 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.031 | 0.038 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.035 | 0.028 |
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".