1991PubMedRequires access

Osteopathic vs. chiropractic education: a student perspective.

Kevin McNamee, K Magarian, R B Phillips, P E Greenman

Open publisher page 6 citations

Abstract

This study compares nationwide survey results from 506 second year students of 11 osteopathic schools and 881 students from the first and second academic year (third term/fourth quarter) of eight chiropractic colleges. Each student was given a questionnaire regarding his/her perspective on the education he/she was receiving. Both populations were questioned about whether or not they came from an osteopathic/chiropractic family, their application process, the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT)/chiropractic adjustments, their first year attitude concerning the efficacy of OMT/chiropractic adjustments, the integration of osteopathic/chiropractic principles into the curriculum and the justification for separate health care professions. Osteopathic and chiropractic students entered their respective professions from nonosteopathic/non-chiropractic families. Although both populations selected their profession as a first and primary choice, chiropractic students were more substantially represented. Upon entering their program, osteopathic students were not convinced, but had an open mind concerning the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT), and were divided as to whether there is enough of a distinction between DOs and MDs to justify separate professions. Chiropractic students, on the other hand, entered their program convinced that chiropractic adjustments are effective, and saw a clear distinction between the roles of chiropractic physicians and medical doctors.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This study compares nationwide survey results from 506 second year students of 11 osteopathic schools and 881 students from the first and second academic year (third term/fourth quarter) of eight chiropractic colleges. Each student was given a questionnaire regarding his/her perspective on the education he/she was receiving. Both populations were questioned about whether or not they came from an osteopathic/chiropractic family, their application process, the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT)/chiropractic adjustments, their first year attitude concerning the efficacy of OMT/chiropractic adjustments, the integration of osteopathic/chiropractic principles into the curriculum and the justification for separate health care professions. Osteopathic and chiropractic students entered their respective professions from nonosteopathic/non-chiropractic families. Although both populations selected their profession as a first and primary choice, chiropractic students were more substantially represented. Upon entering their program, osteopathic students were not convinced, but had an open mind concerning the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT), and were divided as to whether there is enough of a distinction between DOs and MDs to justify separate professions. Chiropractic students, on the other hand, entered their program convinced that chiropractic adjustments are effective, and saw a clear distinction between the roles of chiropractic physicians and medical doctors.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 6 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This study compares nationwide survey results from 506 second year students of 11 osteopathic schools and 881 students from the first and second academic year (third term/fourth quarter) of eight chiropractic colleges. Each student was given a questionnaire regarding his/her perspective on the education he/she was receiving. Both populations were questioned about whether or not they came from an osteopathic/chiropractic family, their application process, the efficacy of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT)/chiropractic adjustments, their first year attitude concerning the efficacy of OMT/chiropractic adjustments, the integration of osteopathic/chiropractic principles into the curriculum and the justification for separate health care professions. Osteopathic and chiropractic students entered their respective professions from nonosteopathic/non-chiropractic families. Although both populations selected their profession as a first and primary choice, chiropractic students were more substantially represented. Upon entering their program, osteopathic students were not convinced, but had an open mind concerning the effectiveness of osteopathic manipulative therapy (OMT), and were divided as to whether there is enough of a distinction between DOs and MDs to justify separate professions. Chiropractic students, on the other hand, entered their program convinced that chiropractic adjustments are effective, and saw a clear distinction between the roles of chiropractic physicians and medical doctors.

Key concepts: Chiropractic, Medicine, Osteopathic medicine in the United States, Curriculum, Osteopathy, Alternative medicine, Medical education, Family medicine

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Osteopathic vs. chiropractic education: a student perspective. — Research Paper | ScholarLens