8. Modelling and teaching collaboration: The interprofessional education in geriatric care project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Interprofessional Education in Geriatric Care (IEGC) project is an Interprofessional Education for Collaborative Patient-centred Practice Initiative (Health Canada) funded project that was launched in June 2005 and ends March 2008. The goal of the IEGC project is to develop a sustainable clinical experience that models and teaches the core concepts of patient centred collaboration (goal directedness, leadership, flexibility, team dynamics, conflict resolution, communication, and disciplinary articulation) which directly reflect the enabling competencies of the “Collaborator Role” outlined in the 2005 CanMEDS Framework. The primary learners are Internal Medicine/Family Medicine residents and senior students in nursing, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and pharmacy. The interprofessional education occurs at three geriatric day hospitals where collaborative patient-centred care of community dwelling older clients is the standard of practice, and clinicians traditionally accept students for clinical placements. The IEGC project identified instances that learners from two or more disciplines were at Day Hospital simultaneously for approximately three weeks. During this time, experiential learning activities emphasizing the skills needed for effective collaboration were added to typical preceptor based teaching. Feedback early in the project from students and preceptors indicated that the original design, (practice simulations and didactic small group sessions), were not meeting clinical learning objectives. In response, the clinical teams initiated team led discussions regarding core concepts and students were given the opportunity to assess and develop care plans for “student team” designated patients. In addition structured team observations, directed readings, self-reflective exercises and “ice-breakers” are utilized. Informal feedback from participants has suggested that this is more effective, and relevant way to teach patient centred collaborative practice. The IEGC project has extensive research and evaluation methods based on the JET’s modification of Kirkpatrick’s Model of Educational Outcomes which will assess the effectiveness and viability of the IEGC educational approach. The Interprofessional Joint Evaluation Team. (2002). A Critical Review of Evaluations of Interprofessional Education. http://www.health.heacademy.ac.uk/publications/ occasionalpaper/occasionalpaper02.pdf/view. Accessed September 9, 2005. Frank JR, Jabbour M, et al. Eds. Report of the CanMEDS Phase IV Working Groups. Ottawa: The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada. March, 2005.
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 | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".