{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018026565464895637, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0018975332068311196, 'mean_word_length': 5.552795031055901, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF PHYSIOTHERAPY IN INDIA WITH THAT OF AUSTRALIAAND NEW ZEALAND

The study aims at studying the Regulatory framework of Physiotherapy in India (NCAHP) as compared to Australia (HPRNL) and New Zealand
(HPCAA). The study highlights the similarities and differences in the regulations of the two countries with India (NCAHP) with respect to 1)
registrations of professionals and 2) Practice Standards for the profession and come up with recommendations that may be incorporated in future
amendments in the NCAHP. The research methodology used is Rapid Appraisal literature review. On comparative analysis it is found that the
Provisions on General, Provisional, Specialty, Limited and student Registration, scope of practice, Fitness to practice and Health and Competence
Performance are not observed in NCAHP and are key requirements to ensure that health professionals are competent and t to practice their
professions and hence come out as key recommendations for inclusions in the future amendments of NCAHP