The Gapps Study Gender and Advanced Physiotherapist Practitioner Satisfaction in Pediatric Rheumatology Opinions of Parents and Teens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives In Canada, Advanced Physiotherapist Practitioners (APP) manage complex rheumatic disease cases in shared care models.[1] The APP role has been studied in adult rheumatology, with little focus on pediatrics or how this role impacts gender.[1] Rheumatic diseases disproportionately affect women with this disparity evident in children, however research is not often tailored to investigate impacts of care based on gender.[2] In a Canadian pediatric rheumatology center with an APP shared care model, we aimed to i) measure and describe parent and patient satisfaction and ii) explore differences between patient and parent responses based on gender. Methods This mixed-methods, cross-sectional study included all parents and patients 12-17 years seen by 1 APP at McMaster Children’s Hospital (June-August 2024). Each family was a unique case with multiple responses (patient and/or parent(s)). Patient and parent demographics were collected. We used an adapted 9-item Visit-Specific Questionnaire (VSQ) with each response reported by 5-point Likert scale (scores transposed to 100) and open-ended questions. Continuous variables were reported using means and 95% confidence intervals, categorical variables using frequencies and proportions. Qualitative responses were analyzed using inductive content analysis. Results Of 43 unique cases, (16 new consults, 27 follow-ups); 44% (n=19) were not rheumatic and 30% (n=13) had juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Of parents (n=50), 64% (n=32) were female, 50% (n=25) and were 41-50 years. Of 16 patients, 69% (n=11) were female and 69% (n=11) were Caucasian. Regardless of gender, both patients and parents reported lower satisfaction for wait time (VSQ1) and discussing arthritis management (VSQ6) (Figure 1). Parents reported >90% satisfaction for explanation of results, technical skills, personal manner and the visit overall (VSQ4,7,8,9). While patients reported >80% satisfaction for personal manner (VSQ8) and >75% for answering questions (VSQ3). Female patients and female parents total VSQ score was 72.2(60.6-84.8); 90.6(86.6-94.7) respectively. Themes that emerged from open-ended questions included: thorough, knowledgeable, friendly and compassionate, provided conservative treatment, value and respect. Figure 1. VSQ-9 Scores and Main Themes from Patient and Parent VSQ-9 Responses Conclusion Parents and patients reported being highly satisfied with APP care in a pediatric rheumatology shared care model. Female patients reported lower satisfaction scores than other groups indicating a need for further investigation of their health care experiences. Lack of validation of the VSQ in pediatric populations may have impacted results as well as relevance of questions regarding arthritis management considering 44% of the sample did not have arthritis. Qualitative descriptions are consistent with APP literature[3] and should be considered when defining important aspects of APP roles. [1.] Ahluwalia V. J Multidiscip Healthc 2021;14:1299-310. [2.] Thierry S. Joint Bone Spine 2014;81(2):112-7. [3.] Fullerton LM. Pragmat Obs Res 2020;11:1-12.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".