ArticleJournal of Taibah University Medical Sciences2024
Exploring UK undergraduate healthcare students' perspectives on how to effectively design IPE: A qualitative study.
Article in Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthcare educators' perspectives on IPE implementation at a Saudi university: a qualitative study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- The Creation of an Interprofessional Education (IPE) Strategy Utilising a Delphi Method.The clinical teacher · 2025Article
- Healthcare Undergraduates' Attitudes and Readiness Toward Interprofessional Education at a Saudi University.Advances in medical education and practice · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To explore healthcare undergraduates' views on how to design effective IPE. The need for interprofessional education implementation in undergraduate healthcare education is gaining wide recognition globally. Students' views about their learning experiences can offer useful insights to advance teaching and learning courses. Thus, in the IPE literature, students' views on how to effectively design IPE can help shape future IPE plans. Methods: Purposeful sampling was used to recruit healthcare students who attended IPE events across three UK institutions. Virtual focus groups were conducted, and audio recorded. Transcripts were thematically analysed and relevant themes were presented under three subheadings, pre, during and post IPE session. Results: Twenty-five students from medicine, nursing, pharmacy, midwifery and other disciplines participated in six focus groups. Students thought IPE should be offered consistently across the programme's years of study to ensure learning continuity. Students from programmes with higher placement hours (nursing and midwifery), suggested more IPE in placement. Pre-IPE sessions, introducing IPE to students attending for the first time was perceived to be important as the lack of awareness/understanding of IPE could adversely impact their willingness to attend and their engagement. During IPE, interaction with other students was perceived as the core of an effective IPE session. Students reported difficulties in communication with other students via online IPE sessions and thought they were less engaged compared to face-to-face sessions. Post-IPE, students valued reflective exercises, whereas traditional formal assessment was seen as a barrier to engagement with the learning. Conclusion: Students considered IPE valuable to prepare for future practice. However, students felt that IPE experiences could be enhanced with proper planning to ensure regular compulsory IPE exposure. For better IPE experiences, IPE design and delivery should be in line with each healthcare programme's unique learning and training curriculum.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.