Logo image
Back
Program standards and student competencies among global chiropractic accreditation agencies: a content analysis
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Program standards and student competencies among global chiropractic accreditation agencies: a content analysis

Claire D. Johnson, Bart N. Green, Lyndon Amorin-Woods, David Byfield, Waleska Crespo-Rivera, Philip Dewhurst, Chantale Doucet, Andy Dunn, Marina Fox, Amanda Jones-Harris, …
BMC medical education, Vol.25(1), 1473
2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-025-08052-3
pdf
Published1.26 MBDownloadView
CC BY V4.0,  Open Access

Abstract

Accreditation Credentialing Health occupations Chiropractic Education
Background Accreditation 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. Methods A 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. Results Neither 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 R2 = 0.96 for student competencies and R2 = 0.87 for program standards; thus, the models’ predictions align with the observed data. Conclusions The 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.

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#9 Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

Source: InCites

Metrics

6 Record Views

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types
Domestic collaboration
International collaboration
Citation topics
6 Social Sciences
6.294 Operations Research & Management Science
6.294.1807 Foresight
Web Of Science research areas
Education & Educational Research
Education, Scientific Disciplines
ESI research areas
Social Sciences, general
Logo image