ArticleBMC medical education2026
Peer facilitators in interprofessional education: a promising response to facilitation challenges.
Article in BMC medical education, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInterprofessional education is an effective and well-recognized strategy to teach healthcare students to work together toward common goals. Still, course implementation faces challenges, as it requires a high demand for human resources to facilitate. While peer teaching is well described in the field of medical education, only a few studies have explored the role of student facilitators in interprofessional education facilitation. This study explored the impact of peer versus faculty facilitators on changes in students’ attitudes toward collaborative learning and interprofessional relationships following participation in an interprofessional education program.
methodsThe authors conducted a pre-post study using a French translation of two subscales from the validated questionnaire “University of West of England Interprofessional Questionnaire” to measure students’ attitudes towards interprofessional relationships and interprofessional learning before and after the course. In March 2023 and March 2024, 256 and 198 students, respectively, from five professions, completed two subscales of the questionnaire before and after the course, with a response rate of 34.1% and 29.2%.
resultsAcross both 2023 and 2024, no significant differences were observed between facilitator groups (peer versus faculty facilitators) at either the pre-test or post-test. In 2023, after the course, students demonstrated a significant improvement in their attitudes towards interprofessional relationships, regardless of facilitator type. This improvement was also statistically significant within specific subgroups: students guided by (1) a faculty facilitator, (2) a combination of a professional and a peer facilitator, and (3) peer facilitators. In 2024, changes in students’ attitudes toward IP relationships were not significant for all students, regardless of the type of facilitator. The results were not significant for the interprofessional learning scale in either 2023 or 2024, for all students as well as within subgroups of facilitators.
conclusionThese findings suggest that peer facilitators can be effective as faculty facilitators in supporting interprofessional education. This study supports the engagement of peer facilitators in the context of interprofessional education to address implementation challenges and promote facilitation sustainability.
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.