MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2032422133 · doi:10.3109/13561820.2013.804042

An interprofessional socialization framework for developing an interprofessional identity among health professions students

2013· article· en· W2032422133 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Khalili, Carole Orchard, Heather K. Spence Laschinger, Randa Farah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Interprofessional Care · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityFanshawe College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdentity (music)SocializationInterprofessional educationHealth professionsConceptual frameworkCurriculumHealth careSocial identity theoryIdentity formationMedical educationProcess (computing)PedagogyPsychologySociologyEngineering ethicsMedicineSelf-conceptSocial psychologyPolitical scienceSocial groupComputer scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although health professional educational programs have been successful in equipping graduates with skills, knowledge and professionalism, the emphasis on specialization and profession-specific education has enhanced the development of a uniprofessional identity, which has been found to be a major barrier to interprofessional collaborative person-centred practice (IPCPCP). Changes within healthcare professional education programs are necessary to enable a shift in direction toward interprofessional socialization (IPS) to promote IPCPCP. Currently, there is a paucity of conceptual frameworks to guide IPS. In this article, we present a framework designed to help illuminate an IPS process, which may inform efforts by educators and curriculum developers to facilitate the development of health professions students' dual identity, that is, an interprofessional identity in addition to their existing professional identity, as a first step toward IPCPCP. This framework integrates concepts derived from social identity theory and intergroup contact theory into a dual identity model of IPS.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.019
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.526
Teacher spread0.475 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations340
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Interprofessional CareSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207