The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A scoping review to improve conceptual clarity of interprofessional interventions
Abstract
Interprofessional education (IPE) and interprofessional collaboration (IPC) have been identified in health education and health care as playing an important role in improving health care services and patient outcomes. Despite a growth in the amount of research in these areas, poor conceptualizations of these interprofessional activities have persisted. Given the conceptual challenges, a scoping review of the interprofessional field was undertaken to map the literature available in order to identify key concepts, theories and sources of evidence. The objective of this review was to develop a theoretically based and empirically tested understanding of IPE and IPC. A total of 104 studies met the criteria and were included for analysis. Studies were examined for their approach to conceptualization, implementation, and assessment of their interprofessional interventions. Half of the studies were used for interprofessional framework development and half for framework testing and refinement. The final framework contains three main types of interprofessional interventions: IPE; interprofessional practice; and interprofessional organization; and describes the nature of each type of intervention by stage, participants, intervention type, interprofessional objectives, and outcomes. The outcomes are delineated as intermediate, patient, and system outcomes. There was very limited use of theory in the studies, and thus theoretical aspects could not be incorporated into the framework. This study offers an initial step in mapping out the interprofessional field and outlines possible ways forward for future research and practice.
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
Foucault, M. (1970) · Social Science Information · doi:10.1177/053901847000900108 · Cited by 10,859
A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population
Haynes, A. B., Weiser, T. G., Berry, W. R., Lipsitz, S. R., Breizat, A.-H. S., Dellinger, E. P., Herbosa, T., Joseph, S., Kibatala, P. L., Lapitan, M. C. M., et al. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0810119 · Cited by 5,688 · cited 2×
“For example, Haynes et al. (2009) reported on the effectiveness of a surgical safety checklist.”
BackgroundResultAudit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes
Ivers, N., Jamtvedt, G., Flottorp, S., Young, J. M., Odgaard-Jensen, J., French, S. D., O'Brien, M. A., Johansen, M., Grimshaw, J., & Oxman, A. D. (2012) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000259.pub3 · Cited by 5,485
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
(2008) · Encyclopedia of Public Health · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5614-7_436 · Cited by 4,527
Moore, F. C. T., Foucault, M., & Smith, A. M. S. (1974) · Man · doi:10.2307/2800094 · Cited by 3,891
Profession of Medicine: A Study of the Sociology of Applied Knowledge.
Clausen, G. T., & Freidson, E. (1971) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2093843 · Cited by 2,049
Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes
Reeves, S., Perrier, L., Goldman, J., Freeth, D., & Zwarenstein, M. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd002213.pub3 · Cited by 1,946
Self-citationFramework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice
Practice, C., & Baker, P. G. (2010) · Cited by 1,858
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Handoll, H. H., Howe, T. E., & Madhok, R. (2002) · Physiotherapy · doi:10.1016/s0031-9406(05)60709-2 · Cited by 1,497
A best evidence systematic review of interprofessional education: BEME Guide no. 9
Hammick, M., Freeth, D., Koppel, I., Reeves, S., & Barr, H. (2007) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/01421590701682576 · Cited by 1,163
Self-citation
Cited by
Interprofessional collaboration to improve professional practice and healthcare outcomes
Reeves, S., Pelone, F., Harrison, R., Goldman, J., & Zwarenstein, M. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000072.pub3 · Cited by 1,156
Self-citationSchot, E., Tummers, L., & Noordegraaf, M. (2020) · Journal of Interprofessional Care · doi:10.1080/13561820.2019.1636007 · Cited by 579
Current trends in interprofessional education of health sciences students: A literature review
Abu-Rish, E., Kim, S., Choe, L., Varpio, L., Malik, E., White, A. A., Craddick, K., Blondon, K., Robins, L., Nagasawa, P., et al. (2012) · Journal of Interprofessional Care · doi:10.3109/13561820.2012.715604 · Cited by 440
Interprofessional education in allied health: a systematic review
Olson, R., & Bialocerkowski, A. (2014) · Medical Education · doi:10.1111/medu.12290 · Cited by 296
Price, S., Doucet, S., & Hall, L. M. (2014) · Journal of Interprofessional Care · doi:10.3109/13561820.2013.867839 · Cited by 128
Metadata
- Authors
- Reeves, S., Goldman, J., Gilbert, J., Tepper, J., Silver, I., Suter, E., & Zwarenstein, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Interprofessional Care
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2010-12-23
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 167-174
- ISSN
- 1356-1820 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-9567
- OpenAlex
- W2158905692
- Cited by
- 305
- References
- 47
- FWCI
- 21.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A scoping review to improve conceptual clarity of interprofessional interventions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3109/13561820.2010.529960
- The paper
- Reeves, S., Goldman, J., Gilbert, J., Tepper, J., Silver, I., Suter, E., & Zwarenstein, M. (2011). A scoping review to improve conceptual clarity of interprofessional interventions. Journal of Interprofessional Care. https://doi.org/10.3109/13561820.2010.529960
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
