Background In physical therapist education, the National Physical Therapy Examination (NPTE) is the predominant measure of student success. Because the NPTE is a high-stakes examination, predicting NPTE performance is important for physical therapist students and programs. Purpose The purpose of this study was to determine the relationships between first-attempt NPTE performance and physical therapist applicant variables and physical therapist student variables. The 4 identified physical therapist applicant variables were undergraduate cumulative grade point average (GPA), undergraduate GPA for prerequisite courses, Graduate Record Examination verbal and quantitative subscale scores, and admission scores. The 4 identified physical therapist student variables were first- and third-year physical therapist student GPA, clinical performance scores (first and final clinical experiences), noncognitive student variables, and comprehensive examination scores. Data Sources A systematic search was performed with the databases PubMed and EBSCO (1966–2018). Study Selection Studies included in the review met the following criteria: the physical therapist education program offered an entry-level master’s or doctorate degree, pertinent data were available for each independent variable, the relationship between the independent variable and the NPTE was investigated, the NPTE was a continuous variable, the program was a US entry-level therapist education program, and the study was peer reviewed. Data Extraction Two independent reviewers completed data extraction and quality appraisal using the McMaster Appraisal Tool. Data Synthesis Random-effects meta-analyses using the Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient as the measure of effect size was used. Limitations Limitations of the review included a lack of homogeneity, high NPTE pass rates, modifications to the McMaster Appraisal Tool, small sample sizes, and publication bias. Conclusions No one physical therapist applicant variable should be used as an independent predictor of first-attempt NPTE performance. For physical therapist students, first- and third-year physical therapist student GPA had a strong relationship with first-attempt NPTE performance; clinical performance had a weak and nonsignificant relationship with first-attempt NPTE performance.
Background and Purpose. Practicing physical therapists seek the highest levels of evidence (ie, systematic review and meta-analysis) to inform clinical decision making. Performing a meta-analysis with assimilated data from a systematic review is important for comprehensive decision making in clinical and educational practice. In educational practice, the Pearson's product–moment correlation coefficient (r) is often used as the measure of effect size to examine causal relationships between variables. Our purpose was to present the best model for conducting a meta-analysis using r. Model Description and Evaluation. A meta-analysis is prescribed through five steps: (1) calculation of the effect sizes, (2) selecting the appropriate effects model and computational method, (3) applying the computational method, (4) performing heterogeneity analysis, and (5) assessing for publication bias. Outcomes. Key statistical outcomes include: (1) total sample size, (2) number of correlations, (3) mean true score correlation, (4) variance of true score correlations, (5) 80% credibility interval, and (6) 95% confidence interval. To help with the interpretation of these results, figures (ie, forest plots and funnel plots) are used. Discussion and Conclusion. Central to achieving evidence-based practice is the selection and application of high-quality research. A systematic review with random-effects meta-analysis using high-quality cohort studies can provide high-quality evidence to physical therapy educators to answer their pertinent education questions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.