Abstract

BackgroundA primary barrier to the implementation of evidence based practice (EBP) in physical therapy is therapists’ limited ability to understand and interpret statistics. Physical therapists demonstrate limited skills and report low self-efficacy for interpreting results of statistical procedures. While standards for physical therapist education include statistics, little empirical evidence is available to inform what should constitute such curricula. The purpose of this study was to conduct a census of the statistical terms and study designs used in physical therapy literature and to use the results to make recommendations for curricular development in physical therapist education.MethodsWe conducted a bibliometric analysis of 14 peer-reviewed journals associated with the American Physical Therapy Association over 12 months (Oct 2011-Sept 2012). Trained raters recorded every statistical term appearing in identified systematic reviews, primary research reports, and case series and case reports. Investigator-reported study design was also recorded. Terms representing the same statistical test or concept were combined into a single, representative term. Cumulative percentage was used to identify the most common representative statistical terms. Common representative terms were organized into eight categories to inform curricular design.ResultsOf 485 articles reviewed, 391 met the inclusion criteria. These 391 articles used 532 different terms which were combined into 321 representative terms; 13.1 (sd = 8.0) terms per article. Eighty-one representative terms constituted 90 % of all representative term occurrences. Of the remaining 240 representative terms, 105 (44 %) were used in only one article. The most common study design was prospective cohort (32.5 %).ConclusionsPhysical therapy literature contains a large number of statistical terms and concepts for readers to navigate. However, in the year sampled, 81 representative terms accounted for 90 % of all occurrences. These “common representative terms” can be used to inform curricula to promote physical therapists’ skills, competency, and confidence in interpreting statistics in their professional literature. We make specific recommendations for curriculum development informed by our findings.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12909-016-0641-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Highlights

  • A primary barrier to the implementation of evidence based practice (EBP) in physical therapy is therapists’ limited ability to understand and interpret statistics

  • By including all peer-reviewed journals associated with the American Physical Therapy Association and its components, our results are specific to physical therapy literature and include all major physical therapy specialty areas within United States practice patterns

  • Statistical terms Initially, 532 terms were identified; those were consolidated to 321 representative terms

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A primary barrier to the implementation of evidence based practice (EBP) in physical therapy is therapists’ limited ability to understand and interpret statistics. Physical therapists demonstrate limited skills and report low selfefficacy for interpreting results of statistical procedures. A primary barrier to the implementation of evidence based practice (EBP) in physical therapy is therapists’ inability to understand and interpret statistics [3,4,5]. After an intensive 6-month educational program to improve EBP skills, experienced physical therapists demonstrated poor skills for interpreting statistical results and reported persistent frustration about difficulty understanding statistical methods and interpreting results from research literature [5]. Few resources are available to facilitate evidence-based development of curricula to promote physical therapist practitioners’ statistical knowledge for understanding and using evidence to inform practice

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call