A Formal Interprofessional Ultrasound Curriculum between Medical and Physical Therapy Students in the First Year Gross Anatomy Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultrasound has been used more frequently in the anatomical sciences to reinforce core anatomy concepts in the classroom and introduce commonly applied imaging technologies encountered in a clinical setting. Interprofessional Education (IPE) is being incorporated into health sciences training as a learning model for real world interactions. The primary objective of the current study was to determine the impact of an IPE ultrasound curriculum on students' anatomy and ultrasound knowledge, as well as attitudes towards interprofessional collaboration. We hypothesized that students who participated in an IPE experience would have improved recall of anatomical and ultrasound concepts as well as improved attitudes and perceptions towards IPE when compared to students who did not participate in an IPE session. First year medical students (MD, n = 40) and first year physical therapy students (PT, n = 25) were randomly assigned to PT‐only, MD‐only, or mixed PT‐MD ultrasound instruction groups studying the shoulder. Students were assessed using an anatomy and ultrasound knowledge test and University of the West of England Interprofessional Questionnaire (UWEIPQ) prior to and following the session. The results of this study suggest that while ultrasound instruction significantly improves ultrasound post‐test scores when compared to pre‐test scores regardless of group assignment (PT‐only: p < 0.001; MD‐only: p = 0.007; PT‐MD: p < 0.001), learning in an interprofessional PT‐MD group did not significantly impact knowledge recall of ultrasound concepts when compared to non‐IPE groups. Interestingly, students in PT‐MD groups had significantly higher anatomy post‐test scores when compared to the MD‐only groups (PT‐MD post‐test = 93.2%; MD‐only post‐test = 84.1%; p = 0.041), but not when compared to the PT‐only groups. Additionally, the results of the UWEIPQ are consistent with the impression that students who participate in an IPE experience are more likely to be cognizant of inherent biases in the interactions between different health professionals as well as demonstrate increased confidence in their interprofessional relationships. In conclusion, our study reinforces that IPE programs should quantify knowledge recall in order to assess the effectiveness of a specific program. Furthermore, such endeavors should assess important competencies including communication, teamwork, and interdisciplinary respect that are necessary to succeed in a multidisciplinary health care team. Support or Funding Information Department of Anatomy, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; Social Science and Humanities Research Council, Government of Canada
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".