Assessing dental hygiene students’ readiness for interprofessional learning and collaborative practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The need for interprofessional education (IPE) has been well documented and communicated by many prominent governmental bodies and health organizations. However, more longitudinal outcomes research is needed to demonstrate the impact of IPE on students' attitudes and behaviors. This study assessed dental hygiene students' readiness for IPE and collaborative practice at the University of British Columbia, Canada. METHODS: A modified Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS) survey was conducted on 23 (96% response rate) second-year dental hygiene students prior to commencing the university's newly integrated 4-week IPE curriculum and immediately following its completion 1 month later. A focus group comprising 5 students then explored learning experiences and impact on attitudes about collaborative practice in greater depth. Curriculum content included professionalism, ethical practice, Indigenous cultural safety, and resiliency. RESULTS: Attitudinal shifts were observed in 3 of the RIPLS measures suggesting that students found greater clarity regarding their professional roles and became more receptive to learning clinical problem-solving skills with other disciplines. No statistically significant differences surfaced between the pre-attitudinal and post-attitudinal RIPLS measures. The focus group revealed 3 prominent themes: greater role clarification, recognition of similarities in knowledge and practice with other professions, and cultivation of professional identity, collegiality, and respect. CONCLUSION: Students found greater clarity about professional roles and developed an enhanced appreciation for working with other health professions after completing the university's month-long integrated IPE curriculum.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".