Blog
About

19
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      A best evidence systematic review of interprofessional education: BEME Guide no. 9

      , , ,   ,

      Medical Teacher

      Informa UK Limited

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          BACKGROUND AND REVIEW CONTEXT: Evidence to support the proposition that learning together will help practitioners and agencies work better together remains limited and thinly spread. This review identified, collated, analysed and synthesised the best available contemporary evidence from 21 of the strongest evaluations of IPE to inform the above proposition. In this way we sought to help shape future interprofessional education and maximize the potential for interprofessional learning to contribute to collaborative practice and better care. To identify and review the strongest evaluations of IPE. To classify the outcomes of IPE and note the influence of context on particular outcomes. To develop a narrative about the mechanisms that underpin and inform positive and negative outcomes of IPE. Bibliographic database searches as follows: Medline 1966-2003, CINAHL 1982-2001, BEI 1964-2001, ASSIA 1990-2003 which produced 10,495 abstracts. Subsequently, 884 full papers were obtained and scrutinized. In addition, hand searching (2003-5 issues) of 21 journals known to have published two or more higher quality studies from a previous review. Peer-reviewed papers and reports included in the review had to be formal educational initiatives attended by at least two of the many professional groups from health and social care, with the objective of improving care; and learning with, from and about each other. Standard systematic review procedures were applied for sifting abstracts, scrutinizing full papers and abstracting data. Two members of the team checked each abstract to decide whether the full paper should be read. A third member was consulted over any discrepancies. Similarly, each full paper was read by at least two members of the team and agreement sought before passing it to one member of the team (SR) for data abstraction. Other members of the team checked 10% of the abstraction records. Coding into a Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) data base led to collection of different outcome measures used in the primary studies via the common metric of an adapted Kirkpatrick's four-level model of educational outcomes. Additionally, a narrative synthesis was built after analysis of primary data with the 3-P model (presage-process-product) of education development and delivery. Government calls for enhanced collaboration amongst practitioners frequently leads to IPE that is then developed and delivered by educators, practitioners or service managers. Staff development is a key influence on the effectiveness of IPE for learners who all have unique values about themselves and others. Authenticity and customization of IPE are important mechanisms for positive outcomes of IPE. Interprofessional education is generally well received, enabling knowledge and skills necessary for collaborative working to be learnt; it is less able to positively influence attitudes and perceptions towards others in the service delivery team. In the context of quality improvement initiatives interprofessional education is frequently used as a mechanism to enhance the development of practice and improvement of services.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Realist review--a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions.

          Evidence-based policy is a dominant theme in contemporary public services but the practical realities and challenges involved in using evidence in policy-making are formidable. Part of the problem is one of complexity. In health services and other public services, we are dealing with complex social interventions which act on complex social systems--things like league tables, performance measures, regulation and inspection, or funding reforms. These are not 'magic bullets' which will always hit their target, but programmes whose effects are crucially dependent on context and implementation. Traditional methods of review focus on measuring and reporting on programme effectiveness, often find that the evidence is mixed or conflicting, and provide little or no clue as to why the intervention worked or did not work when applied in different contexts or circumstances, deployed by different stakeholders, or used for different purposes. This paper offers a model of research synthesis which is designed to work with complex social interventions or programmes, and which is based on the emerging 'realist' approach to evaluation. It provides an explanatory analysis aimed at discerning what works for whom, in what circumstances, in what respects and how. The first step is to make explicit the programme theory (or theories)--the underlying assumptions about how an intervention is meant to work and what impacts it is expected to have. We then look for empirical evidence to populate this theoretical framework, supporting, contradicting or modifying the programme theories as it goes. The results of the review combine theoretical understanding and empirical evidence, and focus on explaining the relationship between the context in which the intervention is applied, the mechanisms by which it works and the outcomes which are produced. The aim is to enable decision-makers to reach a deeper understanding of the intervention and how it can be made to work most effectively. Realist review does not provide simple answers to complex questions. It will not tell policy-makers or managers whether something works or not, but will provide the policy and practice community with the kind of rich, detailed and highly practical understanding of complex social interventions which is likely to be of much more use to them when planning and implementing programmes at a national, regional or local level.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning: a BEME systematic review.

            1969 to 2003, 34 years. Simulations are now in widespread use in medical education and medical personnel evaluation. Outcomes research on the use and effectiveness of simulation technology in medical education is scattered, inconsistent and varies widely in methodological rigor and substantive focus. Review and synthesize existing evidence in educational science that addresses the question, 'What are the features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to most effective learning?'. The search covered five literature databases (ERIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Timelit) and employed 91 single search terms and concepts and their Boolean combinations. Hand searching, Internet searches and attention to the 'grey literature' were also used. The aim was to perform the most thorough literature search possible of peer-reviewed publications and reports in the unpublished literature that have been judged for academic quality. Four screening criteria were used to reduce the initial pool of 670 journal articles to a focused set of 109 studies: (a) elimination of review articles in favor of empirical studies; (b) use of a simulator as an educational assessment or intervention with learner outcomes measured quantitatively; (c) comparative research, either experimental or quasi-experimental; and (d) research that involves simulation as an educational intervention. Data were extracted systematically from the 109 eligible journal articles by independent coders. Each coder used a standardized data extraction protocol. Qualitative data synthesis and tabular presentation of research methods and outcomes were used. Heterogeneity of research designs, educational interventions, outcome measures and timeframe precluded data synthesis using meta-analysis. Coding accuracy for features of the journal articles is high. The extant quality of the published research is generally weak. The weight of the best available evidence suggests that high-fidelity medical simulations facilitate learning under the right conditions. These include the following: providing feedback--51 (47%) journal articles reported that educational feedback is the most important feature of simulation-based medical education; repetitive practice--43 (39%) journal articles identified repetitive practice as a key feature involving the use of high-fidelity simulations in medical education; curriculum integration--27 (25%) journal articles cited integration of simulation-based exercises into the standard medical school or postgraduate educational curriculum as an essential feature of their effective use; range of difficulty level--15 (14%) journal articles address the importance of the range of task difficulty level as an important variable in simulation-based medical education; multiple learning strategies--11 (10%) journal articles identified the adaptability of high-fidelity simulations to multiple learning strategies as an important factor in their educational effectiveness; capture clinical variation--11 (10%) journal articles cited simulators that capture a wide variety of clinical conditions as more useful than those with a narrow range; controlled environment--10 (9%) journal articles emphasized the importance of using high-fidelity simulations in a controlled environment where learners can make, detect and correct errors without adverse consequences; individualized learning--10 (9%) journal articles highlighted the importance of having reproducible, standardized educational experiences where learners are active participants, not passive bystanders; defined outcomes--seven (6%) journal articles cited the importance of having clearly stated goals with tangible outcome measures that will more likely lead to learners mastering skills; simulator validity--four (3%) journal articles provided evidence for the direct correlation of simulation validity with effective learning. While research in this field needs improvement in terms of rigor and quality, high-fidelity medical simulations are educationally effective and simulation-based education complements medical education in patient care settings.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Book: not found

              Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Medical Teacher
                Medical Teacher
                Informa UK Limited
                0142-159X
                1466-187X
                July 03 2009
                January 2007
                July 03 2009
                January 2007
                : 29
                : 8
                : 735-751
                Article
                10.1080/01421590701682576
                18236271
                © 2007

                Comments

                Comment on this article