MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Knowledge translation in interprofessional education: what difference does interprofessional education make to practice?

2008· article· en· W2116560863 on OpenAlexaff
Karen Mann, Joan Sargeant, Tanya Hill

Bibliographic record

VenueLearning in Health and Social Care · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterprofessional educationAttendanceMedicineCurriculumNursingMedical educationFamily medicineHealth carePsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cancer Care Nova Scotia developed an Interprofessional Core Curriculum for Nova Scotia health professionals, using a provincial educational needs assessment of health professionals caring for patients with cancer. This paper reports on the educational outcomes of the Interprofessional Core Curriculum programme, particularly the translation of learning into changes in practice and interprofessional interaction, and factors influencing change. The evaluation was guided by Kirkpatrick's model for assessing educational outcomes and Green and Kreuter's PRECEDE model of factors promoting and impeding change. In total, 411 participants attended the sessions, including nurses (54%), pharmacists (23%), and physicians (11%). We used self‐report questionnaires to assess the transfer of learning into changes in practice and interprofessional interactions. High percentages of participants reported changes in both clinical practice and interprofessional interactions 3 months after the sessions. Frequently reported changes to interprofessional interactions were improved communication, increased confidence and assertiveness in interactions with other health professionals and being more respectful of other professions. Participants identified time and work‐load as major barriers to change as well as lack of micro‐ and macro‐system level support. The most common reported enabler of change was having attended the educational session. Overall, participants were highly supportive of interprofessional education, although when compared to nurses and pharmacists, physicians were less supportive and had proportionately lower attendance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.430 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations28
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLearning in Health and Social CareSame topicInterprofessional Education and CollaborationFrench-language works237,207