Communities of practice to facilitate change in health professions education: A realist synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Communities of practice could contribute to transformations in health professions education to meet complex and emerging challenges. However, little is known about the underlying mechanisms of communities of practice in this setting, and how context influences outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To understand when, why and how communities of practice with health professions education faculty work to facilitate higher education change. DESIGN: A realist synthesis according to the RAMESES standards and steps described by Pawson and colleagues. REVIEW METHODS: Early scoping of the literature informed the development of an initial program theory to describe underlying assumptions about how communities of practice in higher education, implemented with health professions education faculty, were likely to work. The theory was tested and further refined through a realist synthesis. A systematic search for evidence using search terms 'faculty', 'communities of practice' and 'higher education' and related terms was supplemented with citation tracking and hand searching of significant authors and journals. Following study appraisal, data were extracted and synthesised from 21 manuscripts describing 16 communities of practice. The realist synthesis focused on identifying patterns in context-mechanism-outcome interactions, and the alignment with substantive theory. RESULTS: From the included manuscripts, ten context-mechanism-outcome configurations were identified that describe a range of individual, interpersonal and institutional outcomes of communities of practice with health professions education faculty and context-mechanism interactions that contribute to achieving these outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This study expands theoretical understandings of how and why communities of practice work. There is value in communities of practice in the higher education sector, primarily in the field of health professions education. Communities of practice implemented in the context of complex change with participants who have a desire to participate can facilitate change in health professions education, including institutional level changes, through reflection, experiential learning and creating a shared agenda for change. Findings from this study can be used by policy and decision-makers within health education to best apply communities of practice to achieve meaningful outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".