Physical Therapy Student Perceptions of a Global Health Service Learning Experience: A Qualitative Synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Purpose: In March 2019, eight physical therapy students (SPTs) from University of Puget Sound traveled to Zacapa, Guatemala to work with Hearts In Motion to deliver rehabilitation services and education for five days as part of a global health service learning experience (SLE). Throughout the SLE, students responded to journal prompts reflecting on their experiences. This analysis explores the impact of student experiences by identifying recurring themes in journal entries.\nMethods: Eight students provided written consent for analysis of personal journal entries. Three student reviewers completed a qualitative evaluation of journals using a constant comparative method. Reviewers used open coding to determine initial categories and axial coding to cross-link sub-textual themes.\nResults: Four themes emerged from the analysis: 1. Communication: Learning to communicate and build patient relationships while negotiating language and culture barriers, recognizing and addressing miscommunication, collaborating inter-professionally to provide meaningful care. 2. Clinical Development: Improving confidence with clinical skills and critical thinking, discovering resourcefulness, applying and integrating prior coursework. 3. Healthcare Disparities: Recognizing disparities in access to quality care and resources, promoting patient education in the absence of care continuity, responding to severe presentations. 4. Compassionate Empathy: Juggling reactive emotions with professionalism in response to trauma, overcoming feelings of hopelessness, desiring to make a positive impact, building human connection.\nConclusion: Student reflections indicate that this SLE allowed students to recognize healthcare disparities, build clinical and communication skills in an intercultural context, and show compassion in the face of trauma and hardship. These competencies are crucial to the professional development of novice practitioners and reflective of American Physical Therapy Association core values.\nReferences:\n1. Pechak C, Thompson M. International Service-Learning and Other International Volunteer Service in Physical Therapist Education Programs in the United States and Canada: An Exploratory Study. Journal of Physical Therapy Education. 2009;23(1):71- 79.\n2. Smith SN, Crocker AF. Experiential learning in physical therapy education. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017;8:427-433. doi:10.2147/AMEP.S140373\n3. American Physical Therapy Association. Core Values for the Physical Therapist. http://www.apta.org/uploadedFiles/APTAorg/About_Us/Policies/Ethics/CoreValuesEndo rsement.pdf. Published February 4, 2019. Accessed September 25, 2019.\n4. Haines J, Stiller C, Thompson K, Doherty D. Recent Graduates’ Perceptions of the Impact of a 1-Month International Service Learning Experience in Kenya During Their Physical Therapist Assistant Education. Journal of Physical Therapy Education. 2017;31(1):73-79.\n5. McMenamin R, McGrath M, D’Eath M. Impacts of service learning on Irish healthcare students, educators, and communities. Nursing & Health Sciences. 2010;12(4):499- 506. doi:10.1111/j.1442-2018.2010.00568.x\n6. Mu K, Coppard BM, Bracciano A, Doll J, Matthews A. Fostering cultural competency, clinical reasoning, and leadership through international outreach. Occup Ther Health Care. 2010;24(1):74-85. doi:10.3109/07380570903329628\n7. Reynolds P. How Service-Learning Experiences Benefit Physical Therapist Students’ Professional Development: A Grounded Theory Study. Journal of Physical Therapy Education. 2005;19(1):41-54.\n8. Sandoval A, Wildt-Bailey W, Roberts H. Global Health Perspectives in Physical Therapy Education: A Qualitative Report on a Service Learning Experience in Guatemala. Presented at the: Physical Therapy Research Symposium. 37; October 23, 2018. https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/ptsymposium/37.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".