CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 387Interprofessional Education and CollaborationInnovations in Medical EducationInterdisciplinary Research and Collaboration

A systematic review of the effectiveness of interprofessional education in health professional programs

Lapkin, Samuel, Levett-Jones, Tracy, Gilligan, Conor·2013·Nurse Education Today
DOI 10.1016/j.nedt.2011.11.006
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objective The objective of this systematic review was to identify the best available evidence for the effectiveness of university-based interprofessional education for health students.Background Currently, most health professional education is delivered in a traditional, discipline specific way. This approach is limited in its ability to equip graduates with the necessary knowledge, skills and attitudes for effective interprofessional collaboration and for working as part of a complex health care team. Interprofessional education is widely seen as a way to improve communication between health professionals, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes.Inclusion criteria The review included all randomised controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies in which two or more undergraduate or post-graduate health professional groups are engaged in interprofessional education.Review methods A three-stage comprehensive search of ten electronic databases as well as grey literature was conducted. Two independent reviewers assessed each paper prior to inclusion using the standardised critical appraisal instruments for evidence of effectiveness developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute.Results Nine published studies consisting of three randomised controlled trials, five controlled before and after studies and one controlled longitudinal study were included in the review.Conclusion Student's attitudes and perceptions towards interprofessional collaboration and clinical decision-making can be potentially enhanced through interprofessional education. However, the evidence for using interprofessional education to teach communication skills and clinical skills is inconclusive and requires further investigation.Implications for research Future randomised controlled studies explicitly focused on interprofessional education with rigorous randomisation procedures, allocation concealment, larger sample sizes, and control groups, would improve the evidence base for interprofessional education.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nedt.2011.11.006

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Recent studies show that implementation of interprofessional health science curricula is encountering barriers and requires long-term financial and political supports.

    “However, recent studies show that implementation of interprofessional health science curricula is also encountering barriers and requires long-term financial and political supports.82”

    From Barriers and facilitators in the integration of oral health into primary care: a scoping review (2017) · cites this paper as [82]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lapkin, S., Levett-Jones, T., & Gilligan, C.
Affiliations
University of Newcastle Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Lapkin, Samuel
ORCID
Venue
Nurse Education Today
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-02
Volume
33
Issue
2
Pages
90-102
ISSN
0260-6917 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.nedt.2011.11.006
OpenAlex
W2007720710
Cited by
382
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 33 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Nurse Education Today (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UTS ePRESS (University of Technology Sydney) (submittedVersion)
  • NOVA (University of Newcastle Australia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Government
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
Keywords
interprofessional education, health professions education, interprofessional collaboration, communication skills, clinical decision-making, student attitudes, teamwork, healthcare teams
MeSH terms
Health Personnel, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Learning, Program Evaluation, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review