ReviewGMS journal for medical education2025
Teaching/learning formats and cross-cutting issues for the design of interprofessional education for healthcare professions - literature review and analysis of training and examination regulations.
Review in GMS journal for medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interprofessional education in healthcare professions - implementation status and preferences from the perspective of teaching staff.GMS journal for medical education · 2026Article
- Together! Clinic, research and teaching in human medicine, nursing, veterinary medicine and psychology: interdisciplinary, interprofessional, transhierarchical.GMS journal for medical education · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Educational institutions in Germany are facing the challenge of providing healthcare professionals with the skills they need to collaborate interprofessionally. Appropriate skills can be acquired through suitable teaching/learning formats and cross-cutting topics. However, there is a lack of empirical results on the design of appropriate teaching/learning formats in order to apply the cross-cutting topics effectively in as many healthcare professions as possible. Methodology: An integrative literature review on suitable teaching/learning formats was carried out in which 21 titles were analysed and presented in a table. The typology according to Sottas et al. was used as a deductive evaluation framework. In order to identify cross-cutting issues, an analysis of the training and examination regulations for healthcare professions in Germany was carried out, with an evaluation using frequency counts. Results: The three most common cross-cutting topics are counselling, quality assurance and the structured care process. The topics are to be taught using methods such as case-based and problem-oriented learning, interprofessional group work or simulation. The debriefing of interprofessional teaching/learning formats is highly relevant. Discussion & conclusion: Interprofessional teaching for healthcare professions rarely takes place in the form of observation-based and hands-on learning in Germany. In addition, only a few healthcare professions are usually involved in interprofessional teaching and learning formats. Both of these factors impede the teaching of complex interprofessional skills.
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.