Students’ attitudes, beliefs and perceptions surrounding 2SLGBTQIA + health education and inclusiveness in Canadian physiotherapy programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients who identify as 2SLGBTQIA + report negative experiences with physiotherapy. The objectives were to evaluate student attitudes, beliefs and perceptions related to 2SLGBTQIA + health education and working with individuals who identify as 2SLGBTQIA + in entry-level physiotherapy programs in Canada and to evaluate physiotherapy program inclusiveness towards 2SLGBTQIA + persons. METHODS: We completed a nationwide, cross-sectional survey of physiotherapy students from Canadian institutions. We recruited students via email and social media from August-December 2021. Frequency results are presented with percentages. Logistic regression models (odds ratios [OR], 95%CI) were used to evaluate associations between demographics and training hours with feelings of preparedness and perceived program 2SLGBTQIA + inclusiveness. RESULTS: We obtained 150 survey responses (mean age = 25 years [range = 20 to 37]) from students where 35 (23%) self-identified as 2SLGBTQIA + . While most students (≥ 95%) showed positive attitudes towards working with 2SLGBTQIA + patients, only 20 students (13%) believed their physiotherapy program provided sufficient knowledge about 2SLGBTQIA + health and inclusiveness. Students believed more 2SLGBTQIA + training is needed (n = 137; 92%), believed training should be mandatory (n = 141; 94%) and were willing to engage in more training (n = 138; 92%). Around half believed their physiotherapy program (n = 80, 54%) and clinical placements (n = 75, 50%) were 2SLGBTQIA + -inclusive and their program instructors (n = 69, 46%) and clinical instructors (n = 47, 31%) used sex/gender-inclusive language. Discrimination towards 2SLGBTQIA + persons was witnessed 56 times by students and most (n = 136; 91%) reported at least one barrier to confronting these behaviours. Older students (OR = 0.89 [0.79 to 0.99]), individuals assigned female at birth (OR = 0.34 [0.15 to 0.77]), and students self-identifying as 2SLGBTQIA + (OR = 0.38 [0.15 to 0.94]) were less likely to believe their program was 2SLGBTQIA + inclusive. Older students (OR = 0.85 [0.76 to 0.94]) and 2SLGBTQIA + students (OR = 0.42 [0.23 to 0.76]) felt the same about their placements. Students who reported > 10 h of 2SLGBTQIA + training were more likely to believe their program was inclusive (OR = 3.18 [1.66 to 6.09]). CONCLUSIONS: Entry-level physiotherapy students in Canada show positive attitudes towards working with 2SLGBTQIA + persons but believe exposure to 2SLGBTQIA + health and inclusiveness is insufficient in their physiotherapy programs. This suggests greater attention dedicated to 2SLGBTQIA + health would be valued.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".