Cited by 23Interprofessional Education and CollaborationInnovations in Medical EducationInterdisciplinary Research and Collaboration

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Implementing a collaborative medicine and pharmacy educational activity in two countries

Open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To promote better collaboration for patient care, interprofessional education (IPE) is required in many health professions courses. However, successful IPE implementation at scale can be challenging because of complicated logistics and competing priorities. Implementing across multiple geographies adds further complexity. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the implementation of a full cohort IPE activity for medical and pharmacy students delivered at both the Australian and Malaysian campuses of Monash University. DESIGN: We designed a 150-minute, blended learning activity centred around asthma care for second-year medical and pharmacy students. Student perceptions were measured with a pre- and post-activity survey using the validated ten-item, three-factor, SPICE-R2 instrument. Analysis focused on differences between professions and countries. RESULTS: All second-year medicine (N = 301 in Australia and N = 107 in Malaysia) and pharmacy students (N = 168 in Australia and N = 117 in Malaysia) participated in the learning activity. A total of 326/693 (47%) students participated in the associated research by completing both the pre- and post-activity surveys. The pre-activity survey showed significant differences in four items between medicine and pharmacy students in Australia and two items in Malaysia. Post-activity, we observed significant changes in 8/10 items when the two professions were combined. Specifically, we noted changes across the countries in perceptions of roles and responsibilities for collaborative practice and patient outcomes from collaborative practice. CONCLUSIONS: IPE across different professions and countries is feasible. Positive outcomes in role understanding and perceived patient outcomes are achievable through a context-sensitive, locally driven approach to implementation. Longitudinal experiences may be required to influence perceptions of teamwork and team-based care.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10872981.2020.1780697

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 36 · Cited by 23

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. 10.1097/MD.0000000000007336 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.3109/13561820.2012.715604 · DOI
  3. 10.3109/13561820.2014.941212 · DOI
  4. 10.3109/0142159X.2015.1105941 · DOI
  5. 10.1111/medu.13776 · DOI
  6. 10.1111/tct.12796 · DOI
  7. Freeth D, Hammick M, Reeves S, et al. Effective interprofessional education: development, delivery and evaluation [Internet]. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing; 2005 [cited 2019 Oct 3]. 18. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9780470776438.fmatter · DOI
  8. 10.1016/j.jaci.2004.04.042 · DOI
  9. 10.1186/1472-6920-14-72 · DOI
  10. 10.1211/ijpp.18.04.0005.x · DOI
  11. 10.1590/s2175-97902018000417324 · DOI
  12. 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2009.tb02492.x · DOI
  13. 10.1111/nhs.12105 · DOI
  14. 10.1016/j.apnr.2014.03.002 · DOI
  15. 10.1080/13561820.2017.1381076 · DOI
  16. Thistlethwaite JE, 2019, J Interprof Care, 19, 1
  17. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.287 · DOI
  18. 10.1016/j.jtumed.2016.09.001 · DOI
  19. 10.1371/journal.pone.0168863 · DOI
  20. 10.29060/TAPS.2018-3-1/OA1064 · DOI
  21. 10.1186/s12909-019-1525-y · DOI
  22. 10.5688/ajpe80347 · DOI
  23. 10.1186/1472-6920-14-101 · DOI
  24. 10.3109/13561820.2014.947360 · DOI
  25. 10.3109/13561820.2016.1149156 · DOI
  26. 10.1080/13561820.2017.1398720 · DOI
  27. 10.1016/j.sapharm.2019.01.019 · DOI
  28. 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2007.02823.x · DOI
  29. 10.1080/13561820.2017.1376626 · DOI
  30. 10.2147/JMDH.S178566 · DOI
  31. 10.3402/meo.v21.32065 · DOI
  32. Kent F, 2020, Med Educ

Metadata

Authors
Brock, T., Vu, T., Kadirvelu, A., Lee, C. Y., & Kent, F.
Affiliations
  • Monash University (AU)
  • Monash University Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Brock, Tina
Venue
Medical Education Online
Published
2020-01-01
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
1780697-1780697
ISSN
1087-2981 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3036905009
Cited by
23
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Medical Education Online (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Monash University Research Portal (Monash University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History and Philosophy of Science › Interdisciplinary Research and Collaboration
Keywords
interprofessional education, collaborative practice, asthma care, blended learning, student perceptions, teamwork, team-based care, international implementation, Australia, Malaysia
MeSH terms
Asthma, Australia, Education, Medical, Education, Pharmacy, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Malaysia, Patient Care Team, Perception, Students, Medical, Students, Pharmacy, Problem-Based Learning, Professional Role

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