The Impact of Structured Inter-professional Education on Health Care Professional Students' Perceptions of Collaboration in a Clinical Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine how a structured inter-professional education (IPE) clinical placement influences health care professional (HCP) students' perceptions of inter-professional collaboration (IPC) relative to that of students in a traditional clinical placement. METHODS: This study used a mixed-methods design. The Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS) was administered to HCP students (n=36) in two Toronto hospitals before and after a structured 5-week IPE clinical placement to examine changes in their perceptions of IPC. Students in a traditional clinical placement (n=28) were used as a control group. Focus groups were then conducted with seven students who took part in the structured IPE clinical placement. A coding framework was devised a priori, and the qualitative results were used to explain the quantitative findings. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between groups after the structured IPE clinical placement, but the intervention group showed a greater positive trend in total IEPS scores from baseline to follow-up. Qualitative data suggest that students valued the knowledge and skills gained through the structured IPE clinical placement. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that structured IPE clinical placements may provide students with valuable collaborative learning opportunities, enhanced respect for other professionals, and insight into the value of IPC in healthcare delivery. More research is needed to explore other factors that influence specific perceptions among physical therapy students. Findings suggest that structured IPE clinical placements may provide students with valuable collaborative learning opportunities, enhanced respect for other professionals, and insight into the value of IPC in healthcare delivery. More research is needed to explore other factors that influence specific perceptions among physical therapy students.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".