Trial reportBMC medical education2025
Building interprofessional identity in neurology with interactive interprofessional learning: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Healthcare Professionals' Perspectives on Barriers and Facilitators in Care and Rehabilitation of Adults with Myasthenia Gravis in Neurological Departments in Denmark.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDespite the essential role of interprofessional collaboration in neurology, to improve patient outcomes, targeted research on interprofessional learning (IPL) interventions during neurology clerkships remains limited. This study aimed to assess the impact of a brief interactive IPL workshop on interprofessional identity among medical students.
methodsIn this randomized controlled trial, neurology clerkship students (N = 39) were allocated to either a 90-min interactive IPL workshop or a non-interactive control session. We assessed outcomes by triangulating findings across Extended Professional Identity Scale (EPIS-G) scores, challenges and opportunities perceived by students, and reflective responses on interprofessional identity and applicability.
resultsOn a group level, The IPL intervention group (n = 27) demonstrated improvements in all domains of interprofessional identity on the EPIS-G (paired samples t-test, p < 0.001) which was not observed in the control group (n = 10). Communication challenges and resource limitations were primary concerns among students, while information sharing and enhanced patient care emerged as key opportunities. Qualitative analysis highlighted students' increased commitment to collaboration, openness to teamwork, and recognition of the patient care benefits inherent in collaborative practices.
conclusionsAn interactive 90-min IPL workshop within a neurology clerkship can initiate medical students' interprofessional identity formation. Students' insights into relevant challenges and opportunities indicate their basic understanding of the complexity of collaborative practice. This study supports the future integration of IPL specifically within neurology to advance collaborative practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.