Faculty development for interprofessional education in resource-constrained West Africa: priorities, institutional gaps and implementation pathways
Open accessAbstract
Background: Interprofessional education (IPE) is a recognized strategy for addressing healthcare workforce challenges in sub-Saharan Africa, but evidence on faculty preparation in resource-constrained settings is limited. Methods: Between September and November 2024, we conducted a cross-sectional needs assessment of all eligible faculty (n=28; 100% response) at a West African regional medical education and research institute. A validated, pilot-tested semi-structured questionnaire (content validity index 0.89; Cronbach’s α=0.82) assessed demographics, professional development priorities, institutional support, and programme-design preferences. Quantitative data were summarised using frequencies, percentages, weighted priority scores, and five-point Likert means; open-ended items underwent thematic analysis. Results: Most participants held master’s degrees (67.9%, n=19); 60.7% were female, 50.0% held lecturer rank, and 78.6% had under ten years’ teaching experience. Research methodology (85.7%) and data analysis (89.3%) were the top development priorities. Enhanced mentorship was the highest improvement priority (92.9%; mean 4.3/5), yet only 28.6% currently accessed formal mentorship programmes. Institutional support ratings were modest (grand mean 3.1/5), with professional development rated lowest (mean 2.8/5). Key programme characteristics identified were institutional leadership support (89.3%), research-practice integration (85.7%), resource allocation (82.1%), collaborative learning (78.6%), flexible delivery (75.0%), and comprehensive assessment (71.4%). Faculty preferred quarterly delivery (50.0%) in blended formats (75.0%), and 89.3% reported readiness to participate. Conclusions: A pronounced gap exists between faculty demand for mentorship and existing institutional provision. Research-integrated, blended faculty development anchored in formal mentorship is a feasible, contextually appropriate approach to strengthen IPE capacity at this institution; broader generalisability requires multisite investigation.
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
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.
Cites
Steinert, Y., Mann, K., Anderson, B., Barnett, B. M., Centeno, A., Naismith, L., Prideaux, D., Spencer, J., Tullo, E., Viggiano, T., et al. (2016) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2016.1181851 · Cited by 845 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Otchere-Darko, A. A., Sarkar, A., & Roy, D.
- Venue
- International Journal Of Community Medicine And Public Health
- Publisher
- Medip Academy
- Published
- 2026-08-31
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 5017-5024
- ISSN
- 2394-6032 (ISSN-L)
- 2394-6040
- OpenAlex
- W7204751952
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Education
- Keywords
- interprofessional education, faculty development, mentoring, resource-limited settings, West Africa, medical education, institutional support, blended learning, research-practice integration, healthcare workforce, needs assessment
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