Practice analysis and changes to the Chiropractic Board of Clinical Nutrition diplomate exam

Author:

Shotts Bruce L.,Himelfarb Igor,Crawford Greg L.,Harding Justin,Gow Andrew R.

Abstract

Objective The main objective of this study was to report results of the practice analysis survey and to provide insights into the average levels of performance and the importance of professional tasks executed by chiropractic nutritionists. In addition, this study informs the chiropractic community of the changes made to the Chiropractic Board of Clinical Nutrition diplomate exam. Methods Seventy-eight practicing chiropractic nutritionists responded to the practice analysis survey. Their responses were analyzed, and conclusions about frequency and importance of performance tasks were reached. A panel of subject matter experts provided a qualitative review of the survey responses. The quantitative and qualitative analyses of the survey responses indicated that minor changes to the test plan were needed. Results Descriptive statistical techniques were employed to analyze the survey responses. The qualitative panel suggested reducing the number of domains on the nutrition exam from 7 to 6 by combining Laboratory and Nutrition-Specific Testing and Imaging and Other Special Studies domains. Additionally, the panel decided on the final distribution of weights combining the quantitative results with qualitative perspectives. Conclusion The practice analysis is a first step in the definition of the skills required for practicing chiropractic nutritionists. The analysis becomes one of the references and a decision-making tool used by the board for developing and administrating quality assessments.

Publisher

Brighthall

Subject

Chiropractics

Reference30 articles.

1. Handbook for Diplomate Candidates [Internet]. Chiropractic Board of Clinical Nutrition; 2018 [cited 2019 Jul 2]. Available from: https://www.cbcn.us/assets/users/chiro/283/uploads/docs/2018/01/CBCN%20Handbook-June2018.pdf

2. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing . Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education;2014.

3. Anastasi A. Psychological Testing. 6th ed. New York, NY: Macmillan;1988.

4. Cronbach LJ. Five perspectives on the validity argument. In:WainerH,BraunHI,eds.Test Validity. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum;1988: 3– 17.

5. Validation. Kane M. In: Brennan RL, ed. Educational Measurement. 4th ed. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers;2006: 17– 64.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3