TRANSFORMATION OF THE EDUCATIONAL PARADIGM OF PHYSICAL THERAPIST TRAINING: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article carries out a comprehensive theoretical and analytical study of the transformation of the system of training physical therapists in Ukraine in the context of European integration processes and challenges of modernity. Analysis of research. Based on a comparative analysis of domestic and international experience (USA, Canada, EU countries), the essence of the change in the educational paradigm is substantiated: the transition from the traditional biomedical model focused on disease to the biopsychosocial model based on the ICF and management of the functional state of a person. Purpose. To theoretically substantiate the transformation of the educational paradigm of physical therapist training through modeling and comparative analysis of domestic and international education systems. Methods and materials: analysis and synthesis of scientific literature, regulatory documents and educational standards; comparative pedagogical method; modeling method; systemic approach. Results. Using the modeling method, the authors identified and compared two types of educational systems: the “International Autonomous Model” (target benchmark) and the “Domestic Transit Model” (current state). The fundamental differences between them are identified, which consist in the level of professional autonomy of the graduate, the methodology of clinical decision-making (Clinical Reasoning), and the architectonics of practical training. It was established that the key barriers to the modernization of domestic education are "technocentrism" in teaching, fragmentation of clinical practice and dominance of protocol thinking over analytical thinking. Conclusions. The conclusion was made about the need for systematic implementation of a competency approach and objective assessment tools (OSCE) to form a specialist capable of autonomous professional activity.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".