Entry-to-practice competency expectations for health justice in Canadian physiotherapy curricula: A scoping review protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : In Canada, physiotherapists are expected to possess and demonstrate several essential competencies upon entry-to-practice. Over the past decade, knowledge and skills relating to health justice have become increasingly important for healthcare professionals. However, health justice is still an emerging topic among Canadian physiotherapy programs and current curricula may be lacking explicit content to develop knowledge, skills and behaviours related to health justice which can be used to prepare students for entry-to-practice. This paper outlines a protocol for a planned scoping review. The purpose of this scoping review will be to examine existing Canadian entry-level competencies for physiotherapy related to health justice. Methods: A comprehensive literature search will be completed on four databases: OVID MEDLINE, OVID Emcare, OVID Embase, and EBSCOhost CINAHL. This scoping review will include both quantitative and qualitative methodological study designs. A grey literature search will involve advanced Google searches. Two authors will independently screen titles and abstracts to select articles for full text review. Data extraction for each selected paper will be completed independently by two authors using the proposed data extraction form. The extracted data will be presented through tables and a narrative summary that aligns with the objectives and scope of this review. Conclusion: The data collected from this proposed review will identify existing competencies and gaps related to health justice in current entry-level physiotherapy curricula. This information will assist academic programs in understanding how to integrate and identify competencies and frameworks related to health justice into Canadian physiotherapy programs to ensure students are better prepared to provide culturally competent and inclusive care and promote health justice in 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 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 | 0.106 | 0.100 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.020 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.096 | 0.016 |
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".