Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25931670›Full record

ArticlePhysiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada2015

Impact of college-administered quality practice assessments: a longitudinal evaluation of repeat peer assessments of continuing competence in physiotherapists.

Kathleen E Norman, Mary Jane O'Donovan, Fiona Campbell

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Clinician's Commentary on O'Donovan et al.Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada · 2017
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kathleen E NormanSchool of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's University, Kingston.
Mary Jane O'DonovanSchool of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's University, Kingston.
Fiona CampbellQuality Management, College of Physiotherapists of Ontario, Toronto, Ont.
Queen's University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe College of Physiotherapists of Ontario (CPO) developed its peer practice assessment (PA) process under statutory requirements for quality assurance. Each year, a small percentage of physiotherapists, most selected at random, undergo PA. To shed light on continuing competence, we report outcomes from physiotherapists who have had two PAs.

methodsRecords were extracted for physiotherapists with two unrelated PAs. Demographic features, peer assessors' scores, and consequent outcome decisions were examined. Outcomes were examined cross-sectionally (vs. other PAs in the same time period) and longitudinally (within cohort).

resultsBetween 2004 and 2012, 117 Ontario physiotherapists underwent two unrelated PAs, typically 5-7 years apart. This cohort was representative of Ontario physiotherapists in terms of sex ratios, education, and years in practice. At the first PA (PA1), this cohort's outcomes were similar to those of other physiotherapists; at the second PA (PA2), they were better than others undergoing PA1 in the same period (p=0.02). The cohort's outcomes were better at PA2 than at PA1 (p<0.001).

conclusionsPhysiotherapists are likely to meet professional standards in a repeat PA 5-7 years after an initial one. Additional research is required to identify risk factors for not meeting standards. The findings provide empirical evidence to guide ongoing development of the CPO's quality management program.

Indexed as

clinical competencepeer reviewprogram evaluationquality improvement

Identifiers

PMID25931670
PMCPMC4407123
OpenAlexW2057469890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.