The clinical teacher · 2025
Interprofessional Education: A Systematic Review of Educational Methods in Postgraduate Health Professions Programs.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alharbi Nouf Sulaiman, Bukhari Lujayne, Albaz Noof Khalid, Alraddadi Abdulrahman Saleh, Albilehi Reema, Alkahtani Reem, Nasser Seema, Alnahedh Taghreed, Aldriwesh Marwh Gassim
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Several studies on interprofessional education (IPE) explored student's knowledge acquisition, teamwork skills and collaborative behaviours. However, the approaches to teaching and learning IPE remain underresearched and reported especially at the postgraduate level. This systematic review aimed to establish how IPE has been implemented at the postgraduate level among different health professions, focusing on teaching and learning approaches.
METHODS: The systematic review was conducted in 2022-2025. It utilized three carefully identified databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library. Publications were included after being screened based on a clear protocol and preidentified eligibility criteria. The research team used CADIMA software to screen articles published from 2010 to 2025.
RESULTS: Thirty-seven articles were considered in this systematic review. These articles were mainly from the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. Various educational approaches and a wide variety of tools were utilized to deliver IPE among health professionals at the postgraduate level. Yet, the findings indicated that simulation was at the top of the used approaches. This systematic review also revealed that IPE activities at the postgraduate level need to be focused more on interprofessional role learning and dual identity development.
CONCLUSIONS: The evidence synthesized in the current systematic review reveals that educators prefer simulation to deliver IPE activities. Yet, the evidence calls for more focused planning for IPE activities at the postgraduate level to advance IPE delivery and ensure targeting immersion and mastery levels of IPE development.
METHODS: The systematic review was conducted in 2022-2025. It utilized three carefully identified databases: PubMed, ScienceDirect and the Cochrane Library. Publications were included after being screened based on a clear protocol and preidentified eligibility criteria. The research team used CADIMA software to screen articles published from 2010 to 2025.
RESULTS: Thirty-seven articles were considered in this systematic review. These articles were mainly from the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. Various educational approaches and a wide variety of tools were utilized to deliver IPE among health professionals at the postgraduate level. Yet, the findings indicated that simulation was at the top of the used approaches. This systematic review also revealed that IPE activities at the postgraduate level need to be focused more on interprofessional role learning and dual identity development.
CONCLUSIONS: The evidence synthesized in the current systematic review reveals that educators prefer simulation to deliver IPE activities. Yet, the evidence calls for more focused planning for IPE activities at the postgraduate level to advance IPE delivery and ensure targeting immersion and mastery levels of IPE development.