Perceptions of interprofessionalism in health professional students participating in a novel community service initiative
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interprofessional collaboration is integral to effective patient care in today's healthcare system. Early exposure to other professions in a hands-on manner during education can be helpful for future practice. However, opportunities for interprofessional education are typically faculty driven and remain limited. Thirty-eight students from different health professions at the University of British Columbia worked collaboratively to promote cardiovascular risk reduction in Vancouver's Downtown Eastside. Student attitudes toward interprofessionalism were assessed using the Interdisciplinary Education Perception Scale (IEPS). While 38 participants (55%) completed the survey prior to participation in this initiative, only 21 individuals completed the follow-up survey After participation, there were significant improvements in the competency and autonomy (p = 0.02) and perception of actual cooperation (p = 0.04). Students did not report any difference in their perceived need for cooperation after participation in the initiative. These results suggest that student-led community service initiatives can be an effective method for interprofessional education amongst health professional 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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".