Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides an overview of interprofessional education in Canada, with a view to defining programs at all levels in terms of what models have been employed. The available information implies that the lack of convincing evidence of the effectiveness of existing programs is probably the most serious problem for the expansion of interprofessional education. The objectives of the programs are both to increase the knowledge about the other professions and their scope of practice, and to improve team function, and there are a number of well-established interprofessional programs in Canada that are designed to achieve these objectives, and many other examples of programs that are partial or planned. Despite this, the present interprofessional education initiatives tend to involve only a small proportion of the total health work trainees. There is a need for programs that are more widespread. The most frequent model involves a mandatory experience, which is case-based, involves all the students registered in Health Faculties, and where the students form interprofessional student teams. In addition to examining believable cases, the students also learn some specific information about interacting with the other professions and gain knowledge about the roles, knowledge and contributions that can be made by professions other than their own.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".