Global chiropractic accreditation standards:Content assessment and a modified-Delphi and nominal consensus process

Introduction &amp; Aim: Standards from the four international chiropractic program<br/>accrediting agencies have not been systematically studied and analyzed for content.<br/>An assessment of standards will offer valuable information to facilitate communication<br/>between stakeholders. This study categorized program standards and student<br/>competencies from the four chiropractic accreditation agencies worldwide, identifying<br/>similarities and differences.<br/>• Methods: A modified-Delphi study with 21 international chiropractic education expert<br/>panelists was performed from December 1, 2023, to April 18, 2024. Current versions<br/>of the accreditation standards from four international accreditation agencies were<br/>retrieved from publicly facing Internet pages. The agencies were the Council on<br/>Chiropractic Education (United States), European Council on Chiropractic Education<br/>(Europe, United Kingdom, South Africa), Council on Chiropractic Education<br/>Australasia (Australia, New Zealand), and the Council on Chiropractic Education<br/>Canada (Canada). Panelists participated in four consensus rounds of review and<br/>coded all items about program standards and student competencies across<br/>documents. The resulting codes were analyzed for frequency across the accrediting<br/>agencies.<br/>• Results: The final consensus round resulted in high agreement for coding (98%<br/>student competencies, 99% program standards). The student competencies resulted<br/>in 1082 codes, with an average of 4.36 codes per item. The program statements<br/>resulted in 248 codes, with an average of 1.82 codes per item. There were similarities<br/>across all accreditation agencies regarding emphasis and content.<br/>• Conclusion: The findings of this study show similarity and consistency across<br/>accreditation agencies. These findings help to clarify concepts within chiropractic<br/>accreditation and will facilitate dialog about global chiropractic education among

Publication Details

Journal
TeesRep (Teesside University)
Published
2025-05-09
Primary Topic
Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Global chiropractic accreditation standards:Content assessment and a modified-Delphi and nominal consensus process

TeesRep (Teesside University)
Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
article

Global chiropractic accreditation standards:Content assessment and a modified-Delphi and nominal consensus process

article en

Abstract

Introduction &amp; Aim: Standards from the four international chiropractic program<br/>accrediting agencies have not been systematically studied and analyzed for content.<br/>An assessment of standards will offer valuable information to facilitate communication<br/>between stakeholders. This study categorized program standards and student<br/>competencies from the four chiropractic accreditation agencies worldwide, identifying<br/>similarities and differences.<br/>• Methods: A modified-Delphi study with 21 international chiropractic education expert<br/>panelists was performed from December 1, 2023, to April 18, 2024. Current versions<br/>of the accreditation standards from four international accreditation agencies were<br/>retrieved from publicly facing Internet pages. The agencies were the Council on<br/>Chiropractic Education (United States), European Council on Chiropractic Education<br/>(Europe, United Kingdom, South Africa), Council on Chiropractic Education<br/>Australasia (Australia, New Zealand), and the Council on Chiropractic Education<br/>Canada (Canada). Panelists participated in four consensus rounds of review and<br/>coded all items about program standards and student competencies across<br/>documents. The resulting codes were analyzed for frequency across the accrediting<br/>agencies.<br/>• Results: The final consensus round resulted in high agreement for coding (98%<br/>student competencies, 99% program standards). The student competencies resulted<br/>in 1082 codes, with an average of 4.36 codes per item. The program statements<br/>resulted in 248 codes, with an average of 1.82 codes per item. There were similarities<br/>across all accreditation agencies regarding emphasis and content.<br/>• Conclusion: The findings of this study show similarity and consistency across<br/>accreditation agencies. These findings help to clarify concepts within chiropractic<br/>accreditation and will facilitate dialog about global chiropractic education among

TeesRep (Teesside University)
Openalex Percentile: Top 43%
Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.