Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27101814›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2016

A bibliometric analysis of statistical terms used in American Physical Therapy Association journals (2011-2012): evidence for educating physical therapists.

Julie K Tilson, Katie Marshall, Jodi J Tam, Linda Fetters

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2016. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

4 authors.

Julie K TilsonDivision of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, 1540 Alcazar St, CHP 155, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA. tilson@usc.edu.
Katie MarshallDivision of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, 1540 Alcazar St, CHP 155, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA.
Jodi J TamDivision of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, 1540 Alcazar St, CHP 155, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA.
Linda FettersDivision of Biokinesiology and Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, 1540 Alcazar St, CHP 155, Los Angeles, CA, 90089, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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.

Indexed as

BibliometricsPeer Review, ResearchPeriodicals as TopicPhysical Therapy SpecialtyStatistics as TopicTerminology as TopicHumansSocieties, MedicalUnited StatesBibliographic analysisCurriculum designEducationEvidence based practicePhysical therapyStatistics

Identifiers

PMID27101814
PMCPMC4840969

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.