Cited by 0Interprofessional Education and CollaborationInnovations in Medical EducationInterdisciplinary Research and Collaboration

Interprofessional education and collaboration in health professions: A narrative review of global evidence and lessons from the Philippines

Open access
College of Occupational Therapy and Physical Therapy, Velez College, Philippines., Bulan, Paolo Miguel P., Pestaño, Nikki Y., College of Occupational Therapy and Physical Therapy, Velez College, Philippines., Cabazor, Romel V., College of Occupational Therapy and Physical Therapy, Velez College, Philippines., Amanuence, Marelen H., College of Arts and Sciences, Velez College, Philippines. +8 more·2026·Journal of Associated Medical Sciences

Abstract

Background: Interprofessional education (IPE) and interprofessional collaboration (IPC) are globally recognized as strategies for strengthening health systems and improving patient outcomes. Although frameworks and evidence have been well established in high-income countries, insights from low- and middle-income contexts remain limited. In the Philippines, studies on IPE and IPC are emerging but remain fragmented across disciplines and institutions. Objectives: This review aimed to synthesize international and Philippine literature on IPE and IPC, identify key frameworks, experiences, and challenges, and discuss implications for education, practice, and policy development in the Philippine context. Materials and methods: A narrative review approach was used to integrate diverse forms of evidence on IPE and IPC. Sources were identified through PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and relevant organizational reports using the keywords “interprofessional education,” “interprofessional collaboration,” “health professions,” and “Philippines.” Articles published in English between 2000 and 2024 were included if they discussed definitions, frameworks, implementation strategies, challenges, or outcomes. Extracted data were synthesized thematically to operationalize the review objectives, focusing on conceptual and policy foundations of IPE and IPC, evidence of effectiveness, international experiences, the Philippine context and local evidence, and challenges, barriers, and sustainability. Results: Global literature shows that IPE enhances teamwork, communication, and, in some cases, patient outcomes, though findings are often constrained by methodological heterogeneity. International frameworks from Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States establish shared competency domains but highlight challenges in assessment and curriculum integration. Philippine studies demonstrate readiness among students and professionals, pilot initiatives in community and institutional settings, and recurring barriers such as faculty shortages, professional hierarchies, and limited policy support. Sustainability emerged as a major concern in both global and local contexts. Conclusion: IPE and IPC hold significant potential to advance collaborative health professions education in the Philippines and similar low- and middleincome countries. To strengthen sustainability, contextual adaptation of global frameworks, investment in faculty development, alignment of accreditation and policy standards, and longitudinal research are essential to building enduring models that enhance interprofessional collaboration and health system outcomes.

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 · 10.12982/jams.2026.055

Cites

Statistics

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.

Authors
College of Occupational Therapy and Physical Therapy, V. C., Bulan, P. M. P., Pestaño, N. Y., College of Occupational Therapy and Physical Therapy, V. C., Cabazor, R. V., College of Occupational Therapy and Physical Therapy, V. C., Amanuence, M. H., College of Arts and Sciences, V. C., Napalit, L. V. G., College of Arts and Sciences, V. C., Tan, N. P. M., College of Medical Technology, V. C., Malaca, C. S., College of Arts and Sciences, V. C., Estoy, E. C., & College of Nursing, V. C.
Affiliations
Velez College (PH)
Venue
Journal of Associated Medical Sciences
Published
2026-05-02
Volume
59
Issue
2
Pages
234-249
ISSN
2539-6056 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7131618605
Cited by
0
References
0
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Journal of Associated Medical Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
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, interprofessional collaboration, health professions education, Philippines, low- and middle-income countries, teamwork, curriculum integration, faculty shortage, professional hierarchy, sustainability, health system strengthening, faculty development, accreditation

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