Exploring the Concept of Leadership from the Perspective of Physical Therapists in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to examine the perceptions of physical therapists practising in the United States of the importance of leadership characteristics and of demographic traits and other factors that might be associated with perceptions of leadership in three contexts: workplace, health care system, and society. Method: An online questionnaire was distributed through snowball sampling to physical therapists practising in the United States over an 8-week period between October and November 2019. A total of 15 leadership characteristics were rated on a 5-point scale of importance. Results: A total of 278 physical therapists responded to the questionnaire. They rated communication and professionalism as the top two leadership characteristics across all settings. Self-awareness and business acumen were not perceived as important for leadership. No relationship was found between gender and self-declaration as a leader or between a participant’s practice setting and their rating of the importance of leadership characteristics. Conclusions: Our results further the discussion of leadership in the physical therapy profession. They highlight a comprehensive acceptance of leadership characteristics as important regardless of context. Further work will be necessary to transition this declaration of the importance of leadership skills to identifying the essential leadership skills for physical therapist education and clinical 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".