Assessment of Interprofessional Education (IPE) in Community Settings: A Systematic Review

Q2 Nursing
F. Asmara, T. Kristina, D. N. Afifah, D. P. Dewi
{"title":"Assessment of Interprofessional Education (IPE) in Community Settings: A Systematic Review","authors":"F. Asmara, T. Kristina, D. N. Afifah, D. P. Dewi","doi":"10.14710/nmjn.v11i3.34155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: An assessment of methods and tools in interprofessional education (IPE) needs to be conducted to guarantee that the set learning objectives (LOs) or competencies are achieved, especially in community settings. This assessment is essential since in community settings, facilitators and students are not in the same frame, while direct observation is preferable in IPE. The implementation of methods and tools for assessment varies. Mostly, the assessment does not cover all competencies of IPE. Further identification of the way the assessment is conducted as well as the IPE competencies assessed is pivotal.Purpose: This study aimed to review the implementation of IPE in community settings, especially the assessment conducted on the methods and tools used along with the assessors involved and the competencies achieved.Methods: A systematic review was employed as a method in this study. Relevant articles from Science Direct, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Scopus were screened based on the inclusion criteria: publication between 2010–2020, research and review articles, full-text articles, conducted in community settings, and involved assessment in acquiring the competencies. This review included 12 out of 1,273 screened articles. The articles were analyzed qualitatively by identifying the keywords, categories, and themes.Results: The results showed the assessment conducted and the competencies achieved in IPE. The assessment included methods and tools as well as the assessors involved. Most existing studies used students’ perceptions or reflections as the methods and involved less assessors such as supervisors or family members. Meanwhile, the assessment tools focused on certain competencies, such as roles and responsibilities, ethics and values, teamwork, and communication. However, no study assessed all competencies.Conclusion: The analysis resulted in two large topics, i.e., the assessment, which includes the assessment methods and tools as well as assessors involved, and the competencies achieved. It is recommended to conduct further studies to develop objective assessment methods, comprehensive assessment tools, and generic competencies or learning outcomes.","PeriodicalId":36409,"journal":{"name":"Nurse Media Journal of Nursing","volume":"44 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nurse Media Journal of Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14710/nmjn.v11i3.34155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: An assessment of methods and tools in interprofessional education (IPE) needs to be conducted to guarantee that the set learning objectives (LOs) or competencies are achieved, especially in community settings. This assessment is essential since in community settings, facilitators and students are not in the same frame, while direct observation is preferable in IPE. The implementation of methods and tools for assessment varies. Mostly, the assessment does not cover all competencies of IPE. Further identification of the way the assessment is conducted as well as the IPE competencies assessed is pivotal.Purpose: This study aimed to review the implementation of IPE in community settings, especially the assessment conducted on the methods and tools used along with the assessors involved and the competencies achieved.Methods: A systematic review was employed as a method in this study. Relevant articles from Science Direct, MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Scopus were screened based on the inclusion criteria: publication between 2010–2020, research and review articles, full-text articles, conducted in community settings, and involved assessment in acquiring the competencies. This review included 12 out of 1,273 screened articles. The articles were analyzed qualitatively by identifying the keywords, categories, and themes.Results: The results showed the assessment conducted and the competencies achieved in IPE. The assessment included methods and tools as well as the assessors involved. Most existing studies used students’ perceptions or reflections as the methods and involved less assessors such as supervisors or family members. Meanwhile, the assessment tools focused on certain competencies, such as roles and responsibilities, ethics and values, teamwork, and communication. However, no study assessed all competencies.Conclusion: The analysis resulted in two large topics, i.e., the assessment, which includes the assessment methods and tools as well as assessors involved, and the competencies achieved. It is recommended to conduct further studies to develop objective assessment methods, comprehensive assessment tools, and generic competencies or learning outcomes.
社区环境下的跨专业教育评估:系统回顾
背景:需要对跨专业教育(IPE)的方法和工具进行评估,以确保实现设定的学习目标(LOs)或能力,特别是在社区环境中。这种评估是必不可少的,因为在社区环境中,辅导员和学生不在同一个框架中,而在公众教育中,直接观察更可取。评估方法和工具的实施情况各不相同。大多数情况下,评估并没有涵盖IPE的所有能力。进一步确定进行评估的方式以及评估的IPE能力是至关重要的。目的:本研究旨在回顾社会经济学在社区环境中的实施情况,特别是对所使用的方法和工具以及所涉及的评估者和所取得的能力进行的评估。方法:本研究采用系统评价法。根据纳入标准筛选来自Science Direct、MEDLINE、CINAHL和Scopus的相关文章:2010-2020年间发表的文章、研究和综述文章、全文文章、在社区环境中进行的文章,以及参与获得能力的评估。本综述纳入了1273篇筛选文章中的12篇。通过确定关键词、类别和主题,对文章进行定性分析。结果:结果显示了IPE所进行的评估和所达到的能力。评估包括方法和工具以及所涉及的评估员。现有的研究大多以学生的感知或反思为方法,较少涉及导师或家庭成员等评估者。同时,评估工具侧重于某些能力,例如角色和责任、道德和价值观、团队合作和沟通。然而,没有研究评估所有的能力。结论:分析产生了两大主题,即评估,包括评估方法和工具以及所涉及的评估者,以及所获得的能力。建议进行进一步的研究,以制定客观的评估方法、综合评估工具和一般能力或学习成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nurse Media Journal of Nursing
Nurse Media Journal of Nursing Earth and Planetary Sciences-Earth and Planetary Sciences (all)
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信