Interprofessional ambulatory primary care practice-based educational program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although interprofessional teamwork and collaboration are considered key elements for improving patient outcomes, there are few reports of controlled studies involving interprofessional training of health care learners in the ambulatory primary care setting. We describe an educational program for teams of nurse practitioners, family medicine residents and social work students to work together at clinical sites in the delivery of longitudinal care in primary care ambulatory clinics. Year 1 was a planning year. Program evaluation completed at the end of the second curriculum (Year 3) indicated that the changes the team made at the end of the first curriculum (Year 2) resulted in increased appreciation of the training program, greater perception of value of care delivered by interprofessional teams among team learners as compared to non-team learners, and team learner self assessment of improved team skills including working with other professionals, resolving conflict, and integrating prevention and health promotion into health care. Team learners demonstrated an increased awareness of the limits of their own profession's approach to team care. We conclude that interprofessional ambulatory clinical training in primary care where learners work together providing care to patients can contribute to fostering both positive learner attitudes toward interprofessional work and development of team skills.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".