Current state of interprofessional education in Canadian medical schools: Findings from a national survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interprofessional education (IPE) is being increasingly recognised and prioritised in undergraduate medical education. While efforts are underway to integrate IPE into health professional curricula across Canada, the state of IPE in Canadian medical schools remains unclear. This study aims to assess the current practice of IPE in Canadian undergraduate medical curricula. An online survey was distributed to IPE directors (or designees) of all Canadian medical schools. The survey gathered details of the IPE experiences offered, curriculum structure, and perceived barriers to the programmes. The survey was completed by 12 of 17 Canadian medical schools and revealed that IPE is generally well represented in Canadian undergraduate medical education curricula. Reported barriers to IPE efforts included scheduling and funding limitations. By comparison, student interest was one of the least commonly cited issues. It would appear that students and faculty are interested in advancing the state of IPE in undergraduate medical education. The results of this study are crucial as IPE continues to evolve as a component of undergraduate medical curricula across the globe.
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 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 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".