A Novel Pain Interprofessional Education Strategy for Trainees: Assessing Impact on Interprofessional Competencies and Pediatric Pain Knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Health care trainees⁄students lack knowledge and skills for the comprehensive clinical assessment and management of pain. Moreover, most teaching has been limited to classroom settings within each profession. OBJECTIVES: To develop and evaluate the feasibility and preliminary outcomes of the 'Pain-Interprofessional Education (IPE) Placement', a five-week pain IPE implemented in the clinical setting. The utility (content validity, readability, internal consistency and practical considerations) of the outcome measures was also evaluated. METHODS: A convenience sample of 21 trainees from eight professions was recruited over three Pain-IPE Placement cycles. Pre- and postcurriculum assessment included: pain knowledge (Pediatric Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Survey), IPE attitudes (Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale [IEPS]) and IPE competencies (Interprofessional Care Core Competencies Global Rating Scales [IPC-GRS]), and qualitative feedback on process⁄acceptability. RESULTS: Recruitment and retention met expectations. Qualitative feedback was excellent. IPE measures (IEPS and IPC-GRS) exhibited satisfactory utility. Postcurriculum scores improved significantly: IEPS, P<0.05; IPC-GRS constructs, P<0.01; and competencies, P<0.001. However, the Pediatric Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Survey exhibited poor utility in professions without formal pharmacology training. Scores improved in the remaining professions (n=14; P<0.01). DISCUSSION: There was significant improvement in educational outcomes. The IEPS and IPC-GRS are useful measures of IPE-related learning. At more advanced training levels, a single pain-knowledge questionnaire may not accurately reflect learning across diverse professions. CONCLUSION: The Pain-IPE Placement is a successful collaborative learning model within a clinical context that successfully changed interprofessional competencies. The present study represents a first step at defining and assessing change in interprofessional competencies gained from Pain-IPE.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.025 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".