ArticleBMC medical education2025
Program standards and student competencies among global chiropractic accreditation agencies: a content analysis.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Factors associated with student satisfaction in a chiropractic program at a South African university: A cross-sectional study.The Journal of chiropractic education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccreditation of healthcare provider training programs ensures graduate competency and provides a means for programs to improve. Accreditation consistency assures the public that healthcare providers have similar basic training across world regions. Currently, it is unknown if chiropractic accrediting agencies have congruent standards globally. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate similarities and differences in student competencies and program standards among four chiropractic accreditation agencies worldwide.
methodsA quantitative content analysis was performed on accreditation standards from regional international accreditation agencies responsible for accrediting the majority of the world's chiropractic degree programs. Agencies included the Council on Chiropractic Education (United States), the European Council on Chiropractic Education (Europe, United Kingdom, South Africa), the Council on Chiropractic Education Australasia (Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia), and the Council on Chiropractic Education Canada (Canada). The contents of the accrediting standards were coded using a standardized coding list. A modified Delphi technique was used by 21 international experts from December 1, 2023, to April 18, 2024. After four rounds of consideration to achieve consensus, the contents were analyzed for frequency and congruence of coded items across the accrediting agencies' standards. A two-way analysis of variance was conducted to identify if there were any differences among the accreditation agencies.
resultsNeither student competencies [F(3,8) = 0.007, p > .05] nor program standards [F(3,4) = 0.002, p > .05] differed significantly across the accrediting agencies. The statistical relationships between accreditation agencies and coding frequencies remained stable across all coded items, with no single code exhibiting differential performance depending on the accrediting body. The overall model showed R
conclusionsThe study findings demonstrate congruence for student competencies and program standards among chiropractic accreditation agencies across multiple geographic regions. The patterns of content were stable and consistent across the four accrediting agencies, with no evidence of differential effects among the agencies. In addition, this study provides essential details and standardized codes for agencies' documents, which may facilitate dialogue and comprehension among agencies, educators, regulators, governing officials, and other stakeholders in chiropractic education. STUDY REGISTRATION: The study protocol was prospectively registered with Open Science Framework on November 30, 2023 https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/259WC .
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.