评估运动科学相关专业认证标准中的残疾包容性:范围审查。

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 SPORT SCIENCES
Stephanie M Kubiak, Elizabeth A Starns, Rebecca J Wehler, Lindsay A Church, John C Roberts
{"title":"评估运动科学相关专业认证标准中的残疾包容性:范围审查。","authors":"Stephanie M Kubiak, Elizabeth A Starns, Rebecca J Wehler, Lindsay A Church, John C Roberts","doi":"10.1519/JSC.0000000000005016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Kubiak, SM, Starns, EA, Wehler, RJ, Church, LA, and Roberts, JC. Evaluating disability inclusivity in accreditation standards for exercise science-related programs: a scoping review. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2024-The purpose of this scoping review was to determine the level of inclusivity for disability-related language within accreditation standards for exercise science-related bachelor and graduate education programs. Standards from 4 U.S. exercise science-related programmatic accrediting organizations were included in this study. Using the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework, each standard (N = 1,043) was classified as either containing disability-related language or not based on the 8 ICF function and structure categories. Owing to the broad ICF disability framework, standards were further analyzed using open coding. Frequencies and percentages of exercise science-related accreditation standards that included or lacked disability language and to what extent were reported. Of the 1,043 standards, 417 were classified as including language related to at least 1 of the 8 ICF categories. Using a more specific disability definition from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, standards were further analyzed and coded as \"knowledge of\" disability (n = 281; 27%), \"application of\" knowledge (n = 64; 6%), 21 standards were classified as both (2%), and 677 (65%) were classified as having no disability language. \"Knowledge of\" and \"application of\" coded standards were further organized according to subcodes (disability, risk factors, both disability and risk factors, and basic life support or emergency care). The lack of inclusive language identified revealed a critical need to reexamine the inclusivity of disability in accreditation standards to ensure educational curricula equip future fitness professionals with the education and experience needed to confidently and effectively serve persons with disabilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":17129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating Disability Inclusivity in Accreditation Standards for Exercise Science-Related Programs: A Scoping Review.\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie M Kubiak, Elizabeth A Starns, Rebecca J Wehler, Lindsay A Church, John C Roberts\",\"doi\":\"10.1519/JSC.0000000000005016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Kubiak, SM, Starns, EA, Wehler, RJ, Church, LA, and Roberts, JC. Evaluating disability inclusivity in accreditation standards for exercise science-related programs: a scoping review. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2024-The purpose of this scoping review was to determine the level of inclusivity for disability-related language within accreditation standards for exercise science-related bachelor and graduate education programs. Standards from 4 U.S. exercise science-related programmatic accrediting organizations were included in this study. Using the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework, each standard (N = 1,043) was classified as either containing disability-related language or not based on the 8 ICF function and structure categories. Owing to the broad ICF disability framework, standards were further analyzed using open coding. Frequencies and percentages of exercise science-related accreditation standards that included or lacked disability language and to what extent were reported. Of the 1,043 standards, 417 were classified as including language related to at least 1 of the 8 ICF categories. Using a more specific disability definition from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, standards were further analyzed and coded as \\\"knowledge of\\\" disability (n = 281; 27%), \\\"application of\\\" knowledge (n = 64; 6%), 21 standards were classified as both (2%), and 677 (65%) were classified as having no disability language. \\\"Knowledge of\\\" and \\\"application of\\\" coded standards were further organized according to subcodes (disability, risk factors, both disability and risk factors, and basic life support or emergency care). The lack of inclusive language identified revealed a critical need to reexamine the inclusivity of disability in accreditation standards to ensure educational curricula equip future fitness professionals with the education and experience needed to confidently and effectively serve persons with disabilities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000005016\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SPORT SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000005016","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Abstract: Kubiak, SM, Starns, EA, Wehler, RJ, Church, LA, and Roberts, JC.评估运动科学相关项目认证标准中的残疾包容性:范围审查。J Strength Cond Res XX(X):000-000,2024-本次范围审查的目的是确定与运动科学相关的学士和研究生教育项目认证标准中与残疾相关的语言的包容性水平。美国 4 家与运动科学相关的课程认证组织的标准被纳入本研究。采用世界卫生组织的《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》(ICF)框架,根据 ICF 的 8 个功能和结构类别,将每项标准(N = 1,043 )划分为含有或不含有残疾相关语言。由于《国际功能、残疾和健康分类》的残疾框架较为宽泛,因此采用开放式编码对标准进行了进一步分析。报告了与运动科学相关的评审标准中包含或不包含残疾语言的频率和百分比,以及包含或不包含残疾语言的程度。在 1,043 项标准中,有 417 项被归类为包含与 8 个 ICF 类别中至少 1 个类别相关的语言。使用疾病控制与预防中心提供的更具体的残疾定义,对标准进行了进一步分析,并将其编码为 "了解 "残疾(n = 281;27%)、"应用 "知识(n = 64;6%)、21 项标准被归类为两者兼有(2%),677 项标准(65%)被归类为无残疾语言。"知识 "和 "应用 "编码标准根据子编码(残疾、风险因素、残疾和风险因素以及基本生命支持或紧急护理)进行了进一步整理。所发现的缺乏包容性语言的情况表明,我们亟需重新审视认证标准中残疾语言的包容性,以确保教育课程使未来的健身专业人员具备自信、有效地为残疾人服务所需的教育和经验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluating Disability Inclusivity in Accreditation Standards for Exercise Science-Related Programs: A Scoping Review.

Abstract: Kubiak, SM, Starns, EA, Wehler, RJ, Church, LA, and Roberts, JC. Evaluating disability inclusivity in accreditation standards for exercise science-related programs: a scoping review. J Strength Cond Res XX(X): 000-000, 2024-The purpose of this scoping review was to determine the level of inclusivity for disability-related language within accreditation standards for exercise science-related bachelor and graduate education programs. Standards from 4 U.S. exercise science-related programmatic accrediting organizations were included in this study. Using the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) framework, each standard (N = 1,043) was classified as either containing disability-related language or not based on the 8 ICF function and structure categories. Owing to the broad ICF disability framework, standards were further analyzed using open coding. Frequencies and percentages of exercise science-related accreditation standards that included or lacked disability language and to what extent were reported. Of the 1,043 standards, 417 were classified as including language related to at least 1 of the 8 ICF categories. Using a more specific disability definition from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, standards were further analyzed and coded as "knowledge of" disability (n = 281; 27%), "application of" knowledge (n = 64; 6%), 21 standards were classified as both (2%), and 677 (65%) were classified as having no disability language. "Knowledge of" and "application of" coded standards were further organized according to subcodes (disability, risk factors, both disability and risk factors, and basic life support or emergency care). The lack of inclusive language identified revealed a critical need to reexamine the inclusivity of disability in accreditation standards to ensure educational curricula equip future fitness professionals with the education and experience needed to confidently and effectively serve persons with disabilities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.70
自引率
9.40%
发文量
384
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The editorial mission of The Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research (JSCR) is to advance the knowledge about strength and conditioning through research. A unique aspect of this journal is that it includes recommendations for the practical use of research findings. While the journal name identifies strength and conditioning as separate entities, strength is considered a part of conditioning. This journal wishes to promote the publication of peer-reviewed manuscripts which add to our understanding of conditioning and sport through applied exercise science.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信