. 2015 Jan 22;14(1):32–38. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2014.12.002

Table 4.

Spearman’s ρ Correlations of Overall Accuracy of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy (MDT) Classification and Confidence to Utilize MDT for Extremity Problems to Age, Years Since Qualifying as a Practitioner, Years Since Passing the Credentialing Examination of MDT, Gender, Proportions of Workload for Patients With Extremity Problems, and Frequency of Using MDT for Extremity Problems

	2	3	4	5	6	7	8
1. Overall accuracy	.04	− .20	.06	.00	.02	.16	.00
2. Confidence		− .27^a	− .09	− .08	− .20	− .17	.71^b
3. Age			.55^b	− .02	− .21	− .27^a	− .09
4. Years of practitioner				.32^a	.05	− .08	.12
5. Years of Cred.MDT					.20	− .06	− .08
6. Gender						.14	.08
7. Proportion of extremity workload							− .18
8. Frequency of using MDT

Confidence, confidence to utilize MDT for extremity problems (1: not confident, 2: relatively not confident, 3: relatively confident, 4: very confident); Years of practitioner, years since qualifying as a practitioner; Years of Cred.MDT, years since passing the credentialing examination of MDT; Proportions of extremity workload, proportion of workload for patients with extremity problems (1: < 25%, 2: 25%-50%, 3: 50%-75%, 4: > 75%); Frequency of using MDT, frequency of using MDT for extremity problems (0: almost never, 1: some of the time, 2: most of the time, 3: all the time).

< .05.

< .001.