Context: Many newly credentialed athletic trainers gain initial employment as graduate assistants (GAs) in the collegiate setting, yet their socialization into their role is unknown. Exploring the socialization process of GAs in the collegiate setting could provide insight into how that process occurs. Objective: To explore the professional socialization of GAs in the collegiate setting to determine how GAs are socialized and developed as athletic trainers. Design: Qualitative study. Setting: Individual phone interviews. Patients or Other Participants: Athletic trainers (N = 21) who had supervised GAs in the collegiate setting for a minimum of 8 years (16 men [76%], 5 women [24%]; years of supervision experience = 14.6 ± 6.6). Data Collection and Analysis: Data were collected via phone interviews, which were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed by a 4-person consensus team with a consensual qualitative-research design. The team independently coded the data and compared ideas until a consensus was reached, and a codebook was created. Trustworthiness was established through member checks and multianalyst triangulation. Results: Four themes emerged: (1) role orientation, (2) professional development and support, (3) role expectations, and (4) success. Role orientation occurred both formally (eg, review of policies and procedures) and informally (eg, immediate role immersion). Professional development and support consisted of the supervisor mentoring and intervening when appropriate. Role expectations included decision-making ability, independent practice, and professionalism; however, supervisors often expected GAs to function as experienced, full-time staff. Success of the GAs depended on their adaptability and on the proper selection of GAs by supervisors. Conclusions: Supervisors socialize GAs into the collegiate setting by providing orientation, professional development, mentoring, and intervention when necessary. Supervisors are encouraged to use these socialization tactics to enhance the professional development of GAs in the collegiate setting.

Context: Research is limited on the transition to practice of newly credentialed athletic trainers (ATs). Understanding this transition could provide insight to assist employers and professional programs in developing initiatives to enhance the transition.Objective: To explore newly credentialed ATs' experiences and feelings during their transition from student to autonomous practitioner.Design: Qualitative study.Setting: Individual phone interviews.Patients or Other Participants: Thirty-four ATs certified between January and September 2013 participated in this study (18 women, 16 men; age = 23.8 ± 2.1 years; work settings were collegiate, secondary school, clinic, and other). Data saturation guided the number of participants.Data Collection and Analysis: Participants were interviewed via phone using a semistructured interview guide. All interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analyzed through phenomenologic reduction, with data coded for common themes and subthemes. Credibility was established via member checks, peer review, and intercoder reliability.Results: The 3 themes that emerged from the data were (1) transition to practice preparation, (2) orientation, and (3) mentoring. Transition to practice was rarely discussed during professional preparation, but information on the organization and administration or capstone course (eg, insurance, documentation) assisted participants in their transition. Participants felt that preceptors influenced their transition by providing or hindering the number and quality of patient encounters. Participants from larger collegiate settings reported more formal orientation methods (eg, review policies, procedures manual), whereas those in secondary school, clinic/hospital, and smaller collegiate settings reported informal orientation methods (eg, independent review of policies and procedures, tours). Some participants were assigned a formal mentor, and others engaged in peer mentoring.Conclusions: Employers could enhance the transition to practice by providing formal orientation and mentorship. Professional programs could prepare students for the transition by discussing how to find support and mentoring and by involving preceptors who provide students with opportunities to give patient care.

Context: Some newly credentialed athletic trainers (ATs) pursue a postprofessional degree with a curriculum that specifically advances their athletic training practice. It is unknown how those postprofessional programs assist in their transition to practice. Objective: To gain an understanding of initiatives used by postprofessional athletic training programs to facilitate role transition from student to professional during their graduate degree programs. Design: Qualitative study. Setting: Semistructured telephone interviews. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 19 program directors (10 men, 9 women) from 13 Commission on Accreditation of Athletic Training Education-accredited and 6 unaccredited postprofessional athletic training programs. Data Collection and Analysis: Telephone interviews were recorded digitally and transcribed verbatim. For data analysis, we used the principles of general inductive approach. Credibility was maintained using peer review, member checks, and researcher triangulation. Results: Three facilitators of transition to practice emerged: orientation sessions, mentoring, and assistantship. Participants used orientation sessions ranging from a few hours to more than 1 week to provide and discuss program polices and expectations and to outline roles and responsibilities. Faculty, preceptors, and mentors were integrated into the orientation for the academic and clinical portions of the program. All participants described a mentoring process in which students were assigned by the program or informally developed. Mentors included the assigned preceptor, a staff AT, or peer students in the program. The clinical assistantship provided exposure to the daily aspects of being an AT. Barriers to transition to practice included previous educational experiences and time management. Participants reported that students with more diverse didactic and clinical education experiences had easier transitions. The ability to manage time also emerged as a challenge. Conclusions: Postprofessional athletic training programs used a formal orientation session as an initial means to help the newly credentialed AT transition into the role. Mentoring provided both more informal and ongoing support during the transition.

Context: Athletic trainers (ATs) must be equipped with evidence to inform their clinical practice. A systematic, inclusive, and continuous process for exploring research priorities is vital to the success of ATs and, more importantly, their patients' positive outcomes. Objective: To identify research priorities and unify research with clinical practice to improve patient care and advance the profession. Design: Mixed-methods study. Setting: Focus groups and a Web-based survey. Patients or Other Participants: A total of 87 ATs (43 men [49.4%], 44 women [50.6%]; age = 40 ± 11 years; experience = 18 ± 11 years) participated in focus groups. Of the 49 332 e-mails sent, 580 were undeliverable, 5131 ATs started the survey (access rate = 10.5%), and 4514 agreed to participate (response rate = 9.3%). Main Outcome Measure(s): Our study consisted of 6 focus-group sessions, a content-expert review, and a Web-based survey. Themes from the focus groups were used to develop the research priorities and survey instrument. We used the 25-item validated survey to determine whether the research priorities and findings of the focus groups were generalizable. Endorsement of research priorities and recommendations was achieved when respondents indicated they agreed or strongly agreed. Results: Respondents endorsed 5 research priorities: health care competency (n = 4438/4493, 98.8%), vitality of the profession (n = 4319/4455, 96.9%), health professions education (n = 3966/4419, 89.8%), health care economics (n = 4246/4425, 96.0%), and health information technology (n = 3893/4438, 87.7%). We also made the following recommendations: (1) develop funding initiatives that align with the agenda, (2) develop postdoctoral fellowships focused on clinical research, (3) facilitate collaborative relationships between clinicians and researchers, and (4) make research evidence more readily available and more applicable. Conclusions: Using a systematic and inclusive process, we developed a prioritized research agenda for the athletic training profession. The agenda was endorsed by the leaders of each Strategic Alliance organization and adopted as the Athletic Training Research Agenda.

Context: Simulations and standardized patient (SP) encounters are used to provide clinical experiences for students. In athletic training, no research has examined the perceived educational benefits of these interventions. Objective: To explore athletic training students' perceptions regarding small group SP encounters and individual case-based simulations (CBSs). Design: Grounded theory. Setting: One midwestern university. Patients or Other Participants: Nine athletic training students (3 males, 6 females; 20 ± 0.833 years old) who enrolled in a lower extremity orthopaedic evaluation course during their first or second semester in an athletic training program. Main Outcome Measure(s): Semistructured interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using open coding and axial and selective coding (ie, to develop themes/threads). To ensure trustworthiness, we used member checks and peer debriefing. Results: For both the small group SP counter and individual CBS, 2 themes emerged: (1) reflection-on-specific action and (2) increased confidence. Participants reflected on both experiences when providing patient care. Participants felt that both encounters could improve their confidence with regard to future clinical evaluations. Specific to the small group SP encounters, peer-assisted learning emerged as a theme. Participants felt they learned from and with each other when performing the evaluation together. Specific to the individual CBS, organization of thoughts emerged as a theme. During the individual CBSs, participants felt they developed, controlled, and organized their thoughts during the evaluation. Conclusions: Both teaching encounters can be integrated into the curriculum of an athletic training program. Each strategy provides students with a nonthreatening educational experience with no harm to patients. In addition, each encounter can correspond to content taught in the classroom or laboratory. The long-term benefits of small group SP encounters and CBSs are unclear, and more research is needed.

Context: Appropriate methods for evaluating clinical proficiencies are essential in ensuring entry-level competence. Objective: To investigate the common methods athletic training education programs use to evaluate student performance of clinical proficiencies. Design: Cross-sectional design. Setting: Public and private institutions nationwide. Patients or Other Participants: All program directors of athletic training education programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs as of January 2006 (n = 337); 201 (59.6%) program directors responded. Data Collection and Analysis: The institutional survey consisted of 11 items regarding institutional and program demographics. The 14-item Methods of Clinical Proficiency Evaluation in Athletic Training survey consisted of respondents' demographic characteristics and Likert-scale items regarding clinical proficiency evaluation methods and barriers, educational content areas, and clinical experience settings. We used analyses of variance and independent t tests to assess differences among athletic training education program characteristics and the barriers, methods, content areas, and settings regarding clinical proficiency evaluation. Results: Of the 3 methods investigated, simulations (n = 191, 95.0%) were the most prevalent method of clinical proficiency evaluation. An independent-samples t test revealed that more opportunities existed for real-time evaluations in the college or high school athletic training room (t₁₈₉ = 2.866, P = .037) than in other settings. Orthopaedic clinical examination and diagnosis (4.37 ± 0.826) and therapeutic modalities (4.36 ± 0.738) content areas were scored the highest in sufficient opportunities for real-time clinical proficiency evaluations. An inadequate volume of injuries or conditions (3.99 ± 1.033) and injury/condition occurrence not coinciding with the clinical proficiency assessment timetable (4.06 ± 0.995) were barriers to real-time evaluation. One-way analyses of variance revealed no difference between athletic training education program characteristics and the opportunities for and barriers to real-time evaluations among the various clinical experience settings. Conclusions: No one primary barrier hindered real-time clinical proficiency evaluation. To determine athletic training students' clinical proficiency for entry-level employment, athletic training education programs must incorporate standardized patients or take a disciplined approach to using simulation for instruction and evaluation.