Perceptions of Teamwork and Interprofessional Education in Undergraduate Pharmacy Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Interprofessional education (IPE) is a mandatory component of accredited pharmacy programs in North America, yet little is known about pharmacy students’ perceptions.Objective: To survey pharmacy students and characterise their attitudes and interest toward IPE, and identify variables associated with positive perceptions of teamwork. Methods: 88.9% of pharmacy students (n=311) in one Canadian university completed a survey consisting of the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) and additional questions assessing student’s skills, knowledge, and interest in collaboration in September 2015. Descriptive and univariate statistics were calculated between demographic variables and survey scores to identify associations. Results: Reported interest in future interprofessional collaborative training was 94.2%. Mean rank total RIPLS scores were significantly higher in females (p=0.000) and inversely correlated to year of pharmacy, declining by an average of 23 RIPLS points with each year (p=0.000). Conclusion: Pharmacy students are interested in IPE, but their interest but declines with year of study.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".