Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31964659›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2020

Interprofessional education in geriatric medicine: towards best practice. A controlled before-after study of medical and nursing students.

Sanja Thompson, Kiloran Metcalfe, Katy Boncey, Clair Merriman, Lorna Catherine Flynn, Gaggandeep Singh Alg, Harriet Bothwell, Carol Forde-Johnston, Elizabeth Puffett, Caroline Hardy and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Promoting Older Adult Health with Interprofessional Education through Community Based Health Screening.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sanja ThompsonGeratology department, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK sanja@doctors.org.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1696-3229
Kiloran MetcalfeMedical Sciences Division, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Katy BonceyGeratology department, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
Clair MerrimanFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.
Lorna Catherine FlynnNuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Gaggandeep Singh AlgGeratology department, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7802-856X
Harriet BothwellGeratology department, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
Carol Forde-JohnstonFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.
Elizabeth PuffettFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.
Caroline HardyFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.
Liz WrightGeratology department, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
James BealeGeratology department, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK.
John Radcliffe Hospital · GBOxford Brookes University · GBUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate nursing and medical students' readiness for interprofessional learning before and after implementing geriatric interprofessional education (IPE), based on problem-based learning (PBL) case scenarios. To define the optimal number of geriatric IPE sessions, the size and the ratio of participants from each profession in the learner groups, the outcomes related to the Kirkpatrick four-level typology of learning evaluation, students' concerns about joint learning and impact of geriatric IPE on these concerns. The study looked at the perception of roles and expertise of the 'other' profession in interprofessional teams, and students' choice of topics for future sessions. Students' expectations, experience, learning points and the influence on the understanding of IP collaboration, as well as their readiness to participate in such education again were investigated.

designA controlled before-after study (2014/2015, 2015/2016) with data collected immediately before and after the intervention period. Study includes additional comparison of the results from the intervention with a control group of students. Outcomes were determined with a validated 'Readiness for Interprofessional Learning' questionnaire, to which we added questions with free comments, combining quantitative and qualitative research methods. The teaching sessions were facilitated by experienced practitioners/educators, so each group had both, a clinician (either geratology consultant or registrar) and a senior nurse.

participants300 medical, 150 nursing students.

settingTertiary care university teaching hospital.

resultsAnalysis of the returned forms in the intervention group had shown that nursing students scored higher on teamwork and collaboration post-IPE (M=40.78, SD=4.05) than pre-IPE (M=34.59, SD=10.36)-statistically significant. On negative professional identity, they scored lower post-IPE (M=7.21, SD=4.2) than pre-IPE (M=8.46, SD=4.1)-statistically significant. The higher score on positive professional identity post-IPE (M=16.43, SD=2.76) than pre-IPE (M=14.32, SD=4.59) was also statistically significant. Likewise, the lower score on roles and responsibilities post-IPE (M=5.41, SD=1.63) than pre-IPE (M=6.84, SD=2.75).Medical students scored higher on teamwork and collaboration post-IPE (M=36.66, SD=5.1) than pre-IPE (M=32.68, SD=7.4)-statistically significant. Higher positive professional identity post-IPE (M=14.3, SD=3.2) than pre-IPE (M=13.1, SD=4.31)-statistically significant. The lower negative professional identity post-IPE (M=7.6, SD=3.17) than pre-IPE (M=8.36, SD=2.91) was not statistically significant. Nor was the post-IPE difference over roles and responsibilities (M=7.4, SD=1.85), pre-IPE (M=7.85, SD=2.1).In the control group, medical students scored higher for teamwork and collaboration post-IPE (M=36.07, SD=3.8) than pre-IPE (M=33.95, SD=3.37)-statistically significant, same for positive professional identity post-IPE (M=13.74, SD=2.64), pre-IPE (M=12.8, SD=2.29), while negative professional identity post-IPE (M=8.48, SD=2.52), pre-IPE (M=9, SD=2.07), and roles and responsibilities post-IPE (M=7.89, SD=1.69), pre-IPE (M=7.91, SD=1.51) shown no statistically significant differences. Student concerns, enhanced understanding of collaboration and readiness for future joint work were addressed, but not understanding of roles.

conclusionsEducators with nursing and medical backgrounds delivered geriatric IPE through case-based PBL. The optimal learner group size was determined. The equal numbers of participants from each profession for successful IPE are not necessary. The IPE delivered by clinicians and senior nurses had an overall positive impact on all participants, but more markedly on nursing students. Surprisingly, it had the same impact on medical students regardless if it was delivered to the mixed groups with nursing students, or to medical students alone. Teaching successfully addressed students' concerns about joint learning and communication and ethics were most commonly suggested topics for the future.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelControlled Before-After StudiesFemaleGeriatricsGroup ProcessesHospitals, UniversityHumansInterprofessional EducationMalePatient Care TeamProblem-Based LearningProfessional RoleSocial IdentificationStudents, MedicalStudents, Nursinggeriatric medicineinterprofessional education (IPE)medical and nursing studentsolder people

Identifiers

PMID31964659
PMCPMC7045260
OpenAlexW3002927018

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.