The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
High and low functioning team-based pre-licensure interprofessional learning: an observational evaluation
Abstract
Interprofessional education (IPE) is embedded in many health professional training programs, often with a focus on collaborative teamwork. Most studies into whether IPE delivers the desired collaborative teamwork capabilities has tended to rely on short term, self-assessed changes in learners' attitudes, knowledge and skills. This study adopted overt ethnographic observation to understand how a convenience sample of students behave in groups during interprofessional team-based clinical placements. Interprofessional student teams were observed by two independent observers on eight occasions (a total of 720 hours) across three sites. Thematic analysis of the observational data indicates that student teams fell into two categories: higher and lower functioning. Higher functioning teams were observed using humor to build rapport, reduce tension and express humility, and evidenced a greater emphasis on shared client goals. In contrast, lower functioning teams were more formal, with no evidence of humor and less interaction. The higher functioning teams, therefore, not only demonstrated greater interprofessional collaboration they also appeared to have higher levels of psychological safety. Participants in the higher functioning teams also demonstrated mutual trust and confidence and took more risks, often speaking up to provide suggestions, share knowledge and skills, and seek or offer feedback. The results suggest that further explicit training in, and assessment of, psychological safety in IPE needs to be undertaken.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414
Psychological Safety and Learning Behavior in Work Teams
Edmondson, A. (1999) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2666999 · Cited by 12,026
Psychological Safety: The History, Renaissance, and Future of an Interpersonal Construct
Edmondson, A. C., & Lei, Z. (2014) · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091305 · Cited by 2,577
Nembhard, I. M., & Edmondson, A. C. (2006) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.413 · Cited by 2,385 · cited 2×
“Research has shown that some groups are more skillful in managing professional differences than others (Nembhard & Edmondson, 2006).”
BackgroundTaylor, D. C. M., & Hamdy, H. (2013) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2013.828153 · Cited by 1,176
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- 10.1097/CCM.0000000000001136 · DOI
- Anderson L., 2008, The SAGE dictionary of qualitative management research, 151
- 10.1111/nuf.12084 · DOI
- 10.1186/1472-6947-11-32 · DOI
- 10.1007/BF00138871 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/13561820.2016.1220930 · DOI
- Brewer M. L., 2018, International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 19, 169
- 10.1080/13561820.2017.1308318 · DOI
- Brewer M. L., 2013, Journal of Allied Health, 42, 45E
- Bryman A., 2012, Social research methods
- 10.3109/13561820.2015.1070134 · DOI
- 10.3109/13561820.2014.940038 · DOI
- Cresswell J. W., 2012, Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research
- Delamont S., 2007, Qualitative research practice, 205
- Delizonna L., 2017, Harvard Business Review, 2
- Edmondson A. C., 2019, The fearless organization: Creating psychological; safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth
- 10.3109/13561820.2013.807224 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jcrc.2007.12.005 · DOI
- 10.1111/jocn.12198 · DOI
- 10.3402/meo.v20.26691 · DOI
- 10.1136/qshc.2003.008425 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04339.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01271.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.4135/9781412957397 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/13561820500083550 · DOI
- 10.1111/medu.12290 · DOI
- 10.1590/1807-57622014.0092 · DOI
- 10.3109/0142159X.2016.1173663 · DOI
- 10.1002/9781444325027 · DOI
- 10.1177/1059601118756554 · DOI
- 10.2147/JMDH.S76773 · DOI
- 10.3109/13561820.2016.1169262 · DOI
- 10.4300/JGME-D-15-00719.1 · DOI
- 10.1080/13561820.2017.1408576 · DOI
- Yin R. K., 2009, Case study research: Design and methods
- 10.3109/13561820.2014.982789 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Brewer, M. L., & Flavell, H.
- Affiliations
- Curtin University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Brewer, Margo L.
- Venue
- Journal of Interprofessional Care
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2020-07-02
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 538-545
- ISSN
- 1356-1820 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-9567
- OpenAlex
- W3039143437
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 1.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Interprofessional Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Team Dynamics and Performance
- Keywords
- interprofessional education, team-based learning, psychological safety, interprofessional collaboration, clinical practicum, team functioning, trust and confidence, feedback, risk-taking
- MeSH terms
- Cooperative Behavior, Humans, Interprofessional Relations, Learning, Patient Care Team
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