Purpose/Hypothesis The purpose of this study was to determine 1) the prevalence of false beliefs about biological differences between Blacks and Whites among Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) students, and 2) if DPT students evaluate and approach the management of pain differently based on the race of a hypothetical patient.

Methods DPT program directors across the United States were emailed and asked to distribute the survey to students currently enrolled in their respective DPT programs. The survey consisted of 15 questions on beliefs of biological differences between races, as well as questions on the estimated pain intensity and treatment parameters for gender-matched patient cases (one with an ankle sprain and another with low back pain) with randomized race.

Results Of 457 respondents, 72% were female and 80% were White non-Hispanic. Respondents came from 47 states, and 27% of respondents reported growing up in rural, 63% in suburban, and 10% in urban communities. 71% of respondents held at least one false belief about biological differences between Black and White people. Students appraised the hypothetical Black patients with slightly higher pain and recommended more treatment for the Black patients (p<0.05). There were no differences in pain appraisal between students who did and did not hold false beliefs.

Conclusions The majority of students had misconceptions regarding biological differences between Black and White races. However, these misconceptions did not result in meaningful differences between how DPT students appraised or proposed to manage hypothetical Black and White patients.

Clinical relevance Less than 5% of physical therapists in the United States are Black, and racial bias among physical therapists has not been widely studied. By improving understanding of bias and false beliefs in DPT students, this study provides valuable information on the readiness and barriers for our future workforce to provide equitable care.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The University of Miami Institutional Review Board provided approval for this study (# 20201416), all participants consented electronically prior to initiating the survey, and all data were analyzed anonymously.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.