ArticleInternational journal of medical education2025
Balancing creativity and pragmatism: insights from a curriculum for interprofessional learning at Linköping University.
Article in International journal of medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: This study explores the application of the current curriculum, launched in 2016, for interprofessional learning (IPL) at the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences at Linköping University, Sweden. Methods: Perceptions from students, teachers and key persons (n=19) were investigated with focus groups and individual interviews. The interviews explored perceptions of curriculum design, implementation, and interprofessional learning activities. A four-dimensional framework for curriculum development and evaluation constituted the theoretical lens for the analysis. Specifically, a qualitative directed content analysis was used. Results: Four overarching categories were identified. 1) "Aiming towards high quality healthcare professionals working together naturally", included the arguments for IPL within healthcare and why the curriculum revision was conducted. 2) "Comprehending how to work in a group, a team, and an interprofessional team", related to the desired learning outcomes and competencies. 3) "All on board? - The search for meaningful learning activities for students and teachers that the programs embrace", reflected on how learning activities were designed and experienced. 4) "Enhancing legitimacy and the provision of organizational prerequisites for the curriculum", described the organisational structures for enhancing the legitimacy of the IPL curriculum, as well as the role of teachers. Conclusions: This study emphasizes balancing pedagogical innovation with pragmatic considerations for successful curriculum application. The findings highlight the need for experienced teachers, organisational support, and meaningful learning activities that align with both program-specific and interprofessional outcomes. Despite challenges, the current curriculum at Linköping University shows potential as a model for integrating interprofessional learning into health professions education.
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.