Editorial: Opportunities and challenges of interprofessional collaboration and education, volume II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
describes twenty studies and twelve tools, discussing the strengths and weaknesses of each. The paper is a useful resource for educators but highlights the need for a consensus approach to assessment, particularly to support learning effectively.To achieve interprofessional competencies for subsequent health professional practice, relevant learning activities are required. These may be in the formal curriculum, or informal and extracurricular activities developed by the learners themselves. Hirsch et al at the University of Birmingham (UK) studied the impact of an innovative IPE student society, the Knowledge and Skills Exchange (KASE), on participants' subsequent experience as health professionals. 4 Through interviews, the authors identified positive perceptions around themes of interprofessional communication, teamworking, patient-centred care, leadership and organizational skills, confidence and resilience. These findings align with research that early exposure to IPE, relevant to the context of students' lived experience, can have a positive impact on their professional practice including team collaboration, the quality of care provided and job satisfaction, all of which have been shown to contribute to improved health outcomes. 5 6 7 8 9 Formal learning includes interprofessional training wards (IPTW), ie functioning inpatient wards staffed by students working collaboratively under supervision. These wards continue to be evaluated as authentic interprofessional clinical activities. Three papers from Germany focus on IPTWs.Schlosser-Hupf et al 10 looked at the cost-effectiveness of an internal medicine IPTW, an important evaluation as costing health professional education is difficult and rare. 11 The A-STAR IPTW at University Hospital Regensburg was compared to conventional wards. The research analyzed 7,244 patient cases examining economic outcomes and clinical performance. This study demonstrates that IPTWs can be economically viable while providing quality care, even during challenging periods like the COVID-19 pandemic. The authors suggest these findings provide a compelling rationale for broader implementation of such wards as platforms for educating future healthcare professionals.Schwarz et al report on an IPTW in neonatology at a Munich hospital that had a positive impact on IPL and self-assessment of competencies. 12 Emphasising the importance of training in interprofessional facilitation, Müller et al in Freiburg developed and evaluated a faculty development program for medical residents engaging with an IPTW. 13 IPE is thriving in parts of Africa. The African Interprofessional Education Network (AfriPEN) works of the sub-Saharan region hosted its 4 th conference in 2023 on the topic: Are we making a difference in Africa? 14 IPE for the development of an interprofessional identity is being increasingly recognised globally.Reinders et al explore the extended professional identity theory (EPIT) as a framework for fostering interprofessional identities that complement individual professional identities. 16 The authors consider how through integrating interprofessional identity formation with skill development and environmental adaptability, EPIT enhances collaboration in diverse professional settings. The discussion highlights EPIT's potential in Türkiye, particularly in advancing IPE, university engagement, and collaborative strategies while addressing local challenges. IPECP continues to be important for health professionals following qualification. Fleischmann et al.implemented an interprofessional approach to improve medication management for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). 17 The findings of this prospective study demonstrated that integrating pharmaceutical expertise into IBD care significantly improves patient satisfaction, reduces medication-related concerns, and enhances medication safety. The authors advocate for routine medication reviews to optimize therapeutic outcomes and better integrate patient perspectives into clinical practice.The outcomes of IPEC are being researched not only in terms of patient care but also effects on health professional well-being. Ruttmann et al. examined the relationship between interprofessional collaboration and psychological distress among healthcare professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic at a German university hospital. 18 The monocentric cross-sectional study was conducted during the initial pandemic wave and involved 299 healthcare professionals. It highlights the vital role of enhanced interprofessional collaboration in strengthening healthcare professionals' psychological well-being during crises. The authors emphasize the need to foster collaborative environments and integrate IPE to help build resilience in healthcare teams. Professional well-being and patient outcomes are also affected by organisational culture. While the survey instrument developed by Rietdijk et al to assess self-perceived open organizational culture was validated in a hospital pharmacy, 19 it has the potential to be employed in interprofessional practice settings.The development and use of applications (apps) for health professional learning on mobile devices are becoming more widespread. Seelandt et al. evaluated the impact of an evidence-based debriefing app on anesthesia team performance. 20 The researchers observed anesthesia teams during two complex inductions, with teams using the Zurich Debriefing App between procedures.This small pilot study indicates that the app enhances anaesthesia team performance, particularly through senior physicians' reflective contributions. The researchers note that the app offers a resource-efficient way to integrate debriefing into clinical practice, potentially improving interprofessional team functioning and patient safety.Opportunities and Challenges of Interprofessional Collaboration and Education II presents diverse perspectives from education and practice. It provides evidence that the interprofessional field is growing in maturity and rigor. Researchers must continue to move from studies that are narrowly defined in single experiences to exploring interventions across multiple contexts, over time and situated in authentic experiences. This will provide added insight into how IPECP impacts all learners throughout the continuum of health professional education and practice in addition to patient/client outcomes.Word count: 1198
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 | 0.009 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.020 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.008 |
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".