Assessment of Attitudes and Perceptions of Health Care Students in an Inter‐Professional Cadaveric Dissection Elective
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Introduction Inter‐professional education (IPE) within healthcare programs has been associated with improved collaborative behavior, patient care and satisfaction, reduced clinical error, and diminished negative professional stereotypes. An inter‐professional gross anatomy dissection course was created at McMaster University to facilitate IPE. Aim Within the course, a study was conducted to assess the attitudes and perceptions of healthcare students towards inter‐professional (IP) learning, at the entire cohort and at the professional group level. Methods Data was collected from eight cohorts over eight years to determine the influence of this IPE course on the attitudes and perceptions of students towards IPE. Each year, 28–35 first year students in medicine, midwifery, nursing, physician's assistant, physiotherapy, and occupational therapy programs are randomly assigned into inter‐professional teams for 10 weeks; a recent addition to the teams is the speech‐language pathology program. A before/after study design measured changes in attitudes and perceptions amongst all students (n = 191) and within each professional group. At week 1 and week 10 of the course, students were administered two scales to assess attitudes towards IP learning: the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) and the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS). Pre‐ and post‐course sub‐scale score mean differences were assessed using the Wilcoxon Signed‐Rank Test (a = 0.05, two tail hypothesis). Results When assessing the entire cohort together, students experienced significant improvements (p < 0.05) in the following sub‐scales: teamwork and collaboration, positive professional identity, perception of actual cooperation, roles and responsibilities, and competency and autonomy. Although sub‐group analysis revealed that each professional group generally improved their attitudes towards IPE, each professional group performed differently on each sub‐scale. Eg. The only sub‐group that experienced significant improvements (p < 0.05) for the “perceived need for cooperation” sub‐scale were the midwifery students (n =25). Both midwifery and medical students (n =59) were resistant to significant changes in attitudes towards IPE, across 5/7 sub‐scales. Discussion and Conclusion Overall, the course led to a general improvement in attitudes and perceptions of students towards IPE and towards anatomy as a setting for IPE. Findings suggest that academic institutions should support ongoing IPE activities for all students, especially those in midwifery and medical school programs, to better prepare students for IP collaboration in the future. Next steps involve determining if students perform better on the IEPS & RIPLS scales in IP groups that share similar positive professional identity levels. Also, course modifications will be implemented to improve the IPE experience based on sub‐scales with unfavorable effect sizes. Finally, scales that can assess communication skills within the IPE course will be administered. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».