Patients’ Messages as Educators in an Interprofessional Health Education Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Patients have traditionally played a passive role in health professional education. Health Mentors Programs are new, innovative interprofessional education initiatives that involve "health mentors" (volunteer community patient educators), who share their experiences navigating the healthcare system with an interprofessional team of four health professional students. The purpose of this research was to explore what motivated the patient educators to participate in the Dalhousie Health Mentors Program and what messages they wanted to instill in health professional students.Methods: Data were collected through seven semi-structured focus groups (N = 29) and one individual interview (N = 1), which were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Qualitative inductive thematic analysis was used to identify key themes.Findings: Our study demonstrated that patients want to play an active role in educating health professional students with the hope of improving the healthcare system. The mentors wanted to convey to the students the importance of interprofessional collaboration, understanding patients are people first, listening to patients, and understanding the visible and invisible impacts of living with chronic conditions.Conclusions: If we expect our students to become competent in providing interprofessional, patient-centred care, it is important that we provide opportunities for patients to be actively involved in health professional education, as they have important messages that cannot be taught from a textbook.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".