A longitudinal study of the effect of an interprofessional education curriculum on student satisfaction and attitudes towards interprofessional teamwork and education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been limited research on the effect of interprofessional education (IPE) over time on the attitudes of undergraduate health and human service professional students. Previous research in this area has suggested that students from different professions report differing attitudes towards IPE and interprofessional teamwork, and such attitudes may also be influenced by other background characteristics of the students themselves (e.g., gender, age). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the longitudinal effect of the introduction of an IPE curriculum on students' attitudes towards IPE and teamwork. A time series study design was conducted to assess the attitudes of undergraduate health and human service professional students towards IPE and teamwork, and students were also asked to complete satisfaction surveys after IPE curriculum activities. Significant differences in the attitudes of students from different professions and their satisfaction with participation in IPE were reported over the duration of the study. Overall, student satisfaction with IPE participation was relatively positive; however the introduction of IPE curriculum during their undergraduate education did not appear to have a significant longitudinal effect on attitudes towards IPE or interprofessional teamwork. The findings have implications for the design and integration of IPE curriculum within existing uni-professional curriculum.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".