ArticleGMS journal for medical education2026
Interprofessional continuing education in health professions - a scoping review of framework conditions, design processes and evaluation designs.
Article in GMS journal for medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Motivation: Not as easy as it seems.GMS journal for medical education · 2026Article
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
Objective: Little is known about the design of interprofessional continuing education programs and the extent of the professional backgrounds of participants and lecturers, even though this information can be important for planning, implementing and achieving objectives. The aim of this study is therefore to provide a systematic overview of the framework conditions, design processes and evaluation designs of the interprofessional continuing education programs described in these studies. Methods: A scoping review was conducted. A systematic literature search was carried out in the MEDLINE, CINAHL, PROSPERO and ProQuest databases. In addition, relevant, nonindexed journals and grey literature were included and searched manually. The studies were selected on the basis of defined criteria and analysed deductively according to framework conditions and process and outcome criteria on the basis of Freeth and Reeves' "3P model of learning to collaborate". Results: Analysis of the included studies (n=79) revealed that interprofessional continuing education courses are used mainly by members of the medical and nursing professions. Some of the courses are led by interprofessional teams. The pedagogical qualifications of the instructors are rarely reported. Courses often take place in acute inpatient settings as part of emergency simulations. Furthermore, the care of people with certain diseases and communication are addressed relatively frequently. The continuing education courses are evaluated mainly by the participants. Conclusion: To assess the quality of interprofessional continuing education courses, the framework conditions should also be reported in full. Interprofessional events should increasingly offer cross-setting and cross-sector topics and include the perspective of patients in the evaluation.
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.