Attitudes towards chiropractic: a survey of Canadian sport and exercise medicine physicians
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous surveys of physicians revealed diverse attitudes towards chiropractic. One of several strategies proposed by leaders in chiropractic to support the advancement of the profession in North America is to increase opportunities for interprofessional collaboration. One area where chiropractic has achieved some degree of integration in Canada is in the field of sports medicine. A result of the increased integration of chiropractic in the field of sports medicine has been more opportunity for interprofessional collaboration, development of interprofessional relationships and increased exposure to chiropractic. The attitudes of Canadian sport and exercise medicine physicians (CSPs) towards chiropractic are unknown. The purpose of this study is to determine the attitudes and their contributing factors of CSPs toward chiropractic and its use for treatment of athletes and/or Canadians who are participating in sports or exercise (ACSE). METHODS: An invitation to complete the survey was included in a newsletter emailed to active physician members of CASEM (Canadian Academy of Sports and Exercise Medicine) in March and April 2023 and attendees of their symposium. The survey included the Chiropractic Attitude Questionnaire (CAQ), which allowed respondents to indicate their attitudes towards chiropractic care for ACSE using a 5-point Likert scale. The responses to the CAQ were the primary outcome measure. Descriptive statistics, including mean, median, standard deviation, maximum, minimum and range, regression analysis, t-tests, and ANOVAs were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: Seventy CSPs completed the survey (response rate: 11%). The summed CAQ scores ranged from 0 to 68 with a mean of 39.03 and a standard deviation of 15.30. CSPs who worked with a chiropractor in a multidisciplinary setting hold a more positive opinion of chiropractic. An independent samples t-test indicated that there was a significant difference between CAQ scores for those with experience of working with a chiropractor (M = 42.03, SD = 14.99) and those without (M = 29.41, SD = 13.10); t(58) = 3.27, p < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: CSPs attitudes toward chiropractic and its use for treatment of ACSE range from very positive to extremely negative. CSPs who reported to have worked with a chiropractor have more positive attitudes than those that have not.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".