MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799313910 · doi:10.1002/ase.1791

Dissecting through Barriers: A Follow‐up Study on the Long‐Term Effects of Interprofessional Education in a Dissection Course with Healthcare Professional Students

2018· article· en· W2799313910 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnatomical Sciences Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicInterprofessional Education and Collaboration
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterprofessional educationTeamworkHealth careIntervention (counseling)Medical educationPsychologyNursingScale (ratio)MedicinePerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several studies have shown significant improvements in the attitudes and perceptions of healthcare professional students toward interprofessional education (IPE) immediately following intervention with IPE courses. However, there remains little evidence on the lasting effects of IPE courses and the long-term influences of these IPE experiences are poorly documented. The purpose of this study is to assess the long-term effects of an intensive, ten-week interprofessional gross anatomy dissection course at McMaster University. Attitudes and perceptions of past participants towards interprofessional learning were evaluated, now that they have started working with other healthcare professionals outside of the IPE course setting. Thirty-four past participants who have clinical experience working in interprofessional settings or are currently working in the healthcare field completed a follow-up questionnaire consisting of a modified Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) and open-ended questions. Quantitative analysis revealed a significant decrease in their attitude towards teamwork and collaboration and respect for other health professions, but a significant improvement in their understanding of roles and responsibilities compared to their results immediately after the IPE intervention. Qualitative analysis of open-ended questions revealed several themes such as developing interprofessional competencies, developing relationships, and remembering the strengths of the IPE dissection course. The results of this study indicate that the IPE experience in anatomy was highly valued by the students and that past participants maintain a clear understanding of their scope of practice, but the reality of clinical practice may have eroded gains made in the program. Anat Sci Educ. © 2018 American Association of Anatomists.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.500
Teacher spread0.476 · 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