ArticleChiropractic & manual therapies2019
A perspective on Councils on Chiropractic Education accreditation standards and processes from the inside: a narrative description of expert opinion: Part 2: Analyses of particular responses to research findings.
Article in Chiropractic & manual therapies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Design, delivery and effectiveness of health practitioner regulation systems: an integrative review.Human resources for health · 2023Pooled it
- Determining undergraduate pediatric chiropractic competencies and entrustable professional activities: A mixed-method study.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2026Article
- A Delphi panel consensus study validating the appropriateness, relevance, and clarity of quality measures for chiropractic care.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Who are the chiropractic students favouring a limitless scope of practice? Exploring the relationship with personality, magical thinking, and academic achievement.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2022Article
- Recent research into healthcare professions regulation: a rapid evidence assessment.BMC health services research · 2021Review
- Chiropractic students' cognitive dissonance to statements about professional identity, role, setting and future: international perspectives from a secondary analysis of pooled data.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2021Article
- Skills, attitudes and uptake of evidence-based practice: a cross-sectional study of chiropractors in the Swedish Chiropractic Association.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2021Article
- Misinformation, chiropractic, and the COVID-19 pandemic.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Article
- The accreditation role of Councils on Chiropractic Education as part of the profession's journey from craft to allied health profession: a commentary.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Review
- Are Councils on Chiropractic Education expectations of chiropractic graduates changing for the better: a comparison of similarities and differences of the graduate competencies of the Chiropractic Council on Education-Australasia from 2009 to 2017.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2020Article
- Development of Preliminary Integrated Health Care Clinical Competencies for United States Doctor of Chiropractic Programs: A Modified Delphi Consensus Process.Global advances in integrative medicine and healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This is the second article reporting on a study that sought the views of people with extensive experience in Councils on Chiropractic Education (CCEs) on research that has raised concerns about variability in accreditation standards and processes for chiropractic programs (CPs) and chiropractic practice in general. Methods: This qualitative study employed in-depth semi-structured interviews that consisted of open-ended questions asking experts about their thoughts and views on a range of issues surrounding accreditation, graduate competency standards and processes. The interviews were audio-recorded, and transcribed verbatim in June and July of 2018. The transcripts were reviewed to develop codes and themes. The study followed the COREQ guidelines for qualitative studies. Results: The interviews revealed that these CCE experts were able to discern positive and negative elements of the accreditation standards and processes. They were, in general, satisfied with CCEs accreditation standards, graduating competencies, and site inspection processes. Most respondents believed that it was not possible to implement an identical set of international accreditation standards because of cultural and jurisdictional differences. This was thought more likely to be achieved if based on the notion of equivalence. Also, they expressed positive views toward an evidence-based CP curriculum and an outcomes-based assessment of student learning. However, they expressed concerns that an evidence-based approach may result in the overlooking of the clinician's experience. Diverse views were found on the presence of Conclusions: Expert opinions lead us to conclude that CCEs should embrace and pursue the widely accepted mainstream healthcare standards of an evidence-based approach and place the interests of the patient above that of the profession. Recommendations are made to this end with the intent of improving CCE standards and processes of accreditation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.