Attitudes and Beliefs of Physical Therapists and Physical Therapist Students Toward Working With Older Adults: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to systematically review physical therapists' and physical therapist students' attitudes toward working with older adults. METHODS: CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, Scopus, PsycINFO, and SocIndex databases were searched in duplicate (from inception to March 2023). Studies that assessed knowledge on aging, intention to work with older adults or attitudes toward older adults for physical therapist students and/or clinicians, and that were written in English, Finnish, Spanish, or Swedish were included. Grey literature, qualitative studies, or articles of people with a specific diagnosis (eg, dementia) were excluded. All articles were reviewed by 2 authors independently, and consensus was required for inclusion. Data extraction was completed using a standardized data extraction sheet. RESULTS: Of 2755 articles screened, 34 met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies recruited only physical therapist students, 6 recruited only physical therapist clinicians, and 3 involved mixed samples of both. Ten intervention studies were included, all of which recruited physical therapist students. Overall, physical therapist students were observed to have predominantly positive attitudes toward older adults, while clinicians had neutral to weak positive attitudes toward older adults. Both physical therapist students and clinicians were observed to have low knowledge on aging and low intentions to work with older adults. Results from intervention studies suggest that education combined with clinical experience with older adults improves attitudes toward older adults. CONCLUSION: A discrepancy is observed in physical therapists in that although attitudes toward older adults are positive, a lack of knowledge on aging and a disinterest in working with older adults exists. Intervention studies suggest that clinical experience may improve attitudes toward older adults in physical therapist students. IMPACT: Predominantly positive attitudes toward older adults are reported by physical therapist students, while for clinicians mixed results are observed. Education coupled with clinical experiences appears to be effective interventions to improve attitudes toward older adults, but such research has only been explored in student samples.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".