Team-based learning (TBL) has gained popularity across the health professions, including in interprofessional contexts. The authors conducted this systematic review to summarize the published evidence regarding the extent, design, and practice of interprofessional TBL within health professions (including medical) degree programs to inform interprofessional education (IPE) educators and curricula designers.
In June 2020, the authors searched PubMed Central, CINAHL, Web of Science, and ERIC for original research articles describing TBL programs with student representation from multiple health professions degree programs that were published between January 2010 and June 2020. Included articles underwent data extraction for study characteristics (e.g., country of origin, topics covered, class descriptors) and the 7 core design elements of TBL: team formation, readiness assurance, immediate feedback, sequencing of in-class problem solving, the 4 Ss (significant problem, same problem, specific choice, and simultaneous reporting), incentive structure, and peer review.
Twelve articles were included. Significant variability was noted in the application and reporting of the 7 core design elements of TBL, which highlighted challenges to the implementation of interprofessional TBL.
Although the structured format of TBL provides a suitable pedagogy for IPE, this review identified challenges associated with the effective integration of IPE into TBL, including: the unequal distribution of students to teams as a result of there being multiple disciplines from different programs; varied levels of student experience with the pedagogy of TBL; a lack of resources required for large groups of students; timetabling requirements for multiple disciplines from different programs; inability to provide more than 1 TBL session; design of patient cases that suit multiple disciplines; alignment of topics within the curricula of multiple disciplines, programs, and universities; inequities in grading for different students within the same TBL program; and limited opportunity for peer review.

BACKGROUND: There is a global trend towards providing training for health professions students outside of tertiary academic complexes. In many countries, this shift places pressure on available sites and the resources at their disposal, specifically within the public health sector. Introducing an educational remit into a complex health system is challenging, requiring commitment from a range of stakeholders, including national authorities. To facilitate the effective implementation of distributed training, we developed a guiding framework through an extensive, national consultative process with a view to informing both practice and policy.
METHODS: We adopted a participatory action research approach over a four year period across three phases, which included seven local, provincial and national consultative workshops, reflective work sessions by the research team, and expert reviews. Approximately 240 people participated in these activities. Engagement with the national department of health and health professions council further informed the development of the Framework.
RESULTS: Each successive \'feedback loop\' contributed to the development of the Framework which comprised a set of guiding principles, as well as the components essential to the effective implementation of distributed training. Analysis further pointed to the centrality of relationships, while emphasising the importance of involving all sectors relevant to the training of health professionals. A tool to facilitate the implementation of the Framework was also developed, incorporating a set of \'Simple Rules for Effective distributed health professions training\'. A national consensus statement was adopted.
CONCLUSIONS: In this project, we drew on the thinking and practices of key stakeholders to enable a synthesis between their embodied and inscribed knowledge, and the prevailing literature, this with a view to further enaction as the knowledge generators become knowledge users. The Framework and its subsequent implementation has not only assisted us to apply the evidence to our educational practice, but also to begin to influence policy at a national level.

The purpose of this article is to report on the outcomes of an interprofessional education (IPE) consensus-building exercise amongst student leaders enrolled in health science-related degree programs. The 12 participants included undergraduate and graduate students from eight different universities situated in five Canadian provinces. Their areas of study spanned a broad range of professions and disciplines including child and youth care, health promotion, nursing, kinesiology, medicine, physical education, psychology, and social work. A consensus statement regarding IPE and, more specifically, \"what we know,\" \"what we don\'t know,\" and \"where do we go from here\" is presented. These insights are unique, and a willingness to embrace them may be critical in building the next generation of improved IPE offerings across the country.

OBJECTIVE: Knowledge of evidence-based exercise prescription guidelines is considered a cornerstone of responsible professional practice. While many academics insist that a university degree in kinesiology or a related field should be required for all exercise professionals, the learning of exercise prescription guidelines that takes place during the course of a university degree program has not been investigated.
METHODS: An 11-question knowledge quiz about the frequency, duration, and intensity of cardiovascular exercise recommended by the American College of Sports Medicine (Garber et al., 2011) was administered to 683 undergraduate students majoring in kinesiology and 89 certified exercise professionals.
RESULTS: Knowledge scores improved significantly, F(4, 764) = 16.69, p < .001, η2 = .08, from the freshmen, who scored 24.30%, to the seniors, who scored 36.25%. Seniors did not differ significantly from the professionals, who scored 40.65%, despite the fact that 58.14% of professionals had graduate degrees and 44.95% had multiple certifications. However, 82.77% of seniors perceived that their knowledge of the guidelines (rated 5.48 out of 10) was lower than that required \"to be able to function as an exercise professional safely and effectively\" (rated 8.17).
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that although significant learning of the guidelines occurs in a typical kinesiology curriculum, there is considerable room for improvement.

OBJECTIVE: Although the use of portfolios is widespread within healthcare education, agreement on their purpose, content, assessment and value is still debated. The objective of this study was to achieve consensus on quality criteria for clinical practice portfolios that would act as guidance for students and lecturers.
METHODS: A Delphi survey was undertaken to seek consensus on the opinions of 23 \'expert participants\' through a series of rounds of structured questionnaires. The Delphi tool was produced as an on-line survey questionnaire and panel experts were invited to score statements using a discrete 7 point visual analogue scale. The statements were written as quality criteria relating to portfolio development which had been identified from the literature and by the research team. The survey employed three rounds of feedback and consensus was measured as 80% agreement for each quality criteria scoring 5 and above.
RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 31 quality criteria which were categorised into 4 areas: structured collection of labelled evidence; nature of evidence; critical reflection; and assessment and judgement. Mean scores for the final wording of the quality criteria ranged from 5.3 to 6.8 with the standard deviation for all of the mean scores being below 1.5. There was consensus that these quality criteria were relevant to health and social care professionals involved in developing clinical practice portfolios.
CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi process facilitated exchange of ideas amongst panel \'experts\' about the content and evaluation of clinical practice portfolios, with most debate relating to judgement of competence and rewarding originality and creativity. These issues illustrate the tensions between educational values and professional constraints. The Delphi process proved to be an effective method for achieving consensus on quality criteria for clinical practice portfolios and enabled the development of validated guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to evaluate whether the introduction of new evidence based portfolio guidelines helped students and assessors to understand the expectations for completion of a clinical practice portfolio, and whether this understanding resulted in the submission of evidence consistent with the guidelines.
METHODS: New evidence based portfolio guidelines were introduced to an undergraduate BSc (Hons) Radiography (Diagnostic) programme. A total of 134 students completed 12 item questionnaires relating to using the portfolio guidelines. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken with 12 students and 5 lecturer practitioners. Documentary analysis was undertaken on 26 portfolios.
RESULTS: Survey data indicated that the new guidelines increased students\' understanding of portfolio evidence requirements. Statistically significant increases in scores were evident for only two out of 12 questions; these related to understanding the need for critical reflection and which elements of the portfolio would be rewarded in assessment. Survey data also indicated some dissatisfaction with the role of lecturer practitioners and clinical assessors in relation to portfolio development. Interviews provided more mixed perceptions of the contribution of enhanced guidelines and identified some reasons for dissatisfaction with the lecturer practitioner and clinical assessor role. Documentary analysis indicated that whilst the guidelines improved students\' and lecturers\' understanding of evidence requirements, this did not translate into portfolio evidence which matched guideline expectations. Portfolio evidence was restricted to meeting the minimum profession specific task requirements and often indicated a mis-match between guideline expectations and assessor assessment judgements.
CONCLUSIONS: New evidence based guidelines improved understanding of evidence and presentation requirements for clinical practice portfolios. Consistent interpretation of portfolio guidelines however requires structured preparation and ongoing support of students, assessors and lecturers if the pedagogic aims for clinical portfolio use are to become an integral part of providing evidence of meeting professional competence requirements.

Interprofessional education (IPE) is an important step in advancing health professional education for many years and has been endorsed by the Institute of Medicine as a mechanism to improve the overall quality of health care. IPE has also become an area of focus for the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP), with several groups, including these authors from the AACP Interprofessional Education Task Force, working on developing resources to promote and support IPE planning and development. This review provides background on the definition of IPE, evidence to support IPE, the need for IPE, student competencies and objectives for IPE, barriers to implementation of IPE, and elements critical for successfully implementing IPE.

BACKGROUND: The People in Pain course was set up as a joint initiative of the Departments of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy within the School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences at The University of Queensland. It was instigated in response to the publication of Pain Curricula for Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) in 1994 (1). The first year it was offered, the \"People in Pain\" course comprised 14 h of lecture content. It was then expanded to encompass 28 h of lectures and seminar involvement.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of participation in a university pain course that meets the IASP pain curricula guidelines to increase health professional students\' knowledge about pain.
METHODS: Students who participated in the People in Pain course over the first three years were invited to complete the Revised Pain Knowledge and Attitudes Questionnaire (R-PKAQ) pre- and postcourse. Data obtained from 22 students in the short course formed a pilot project, and data from 22 students in the longer version of the course were used in the present study.
RESULTS: Examination of the correlation matrix indicated substantial correlations between all R-PKAQ subscales except physiological basis of pain and pharmacological management of pain. In both the pilot project during the first year of the course and the expanded course in the following two years, significant improvement was found in the students\' knowledge on five of the six subscales of the R-PKAQ: physiological basis of pain, psychological factors of pain perception, assessment and measurement of pain, cognitive-behavioural methods of pain relief, and pharmacological management of pain. Improvements in the developmental aspects of pain perception subscale failed to reach significance.
CONCLUSIONS: An integrated pain course developed according to the pain curriculum guidelines developed by the IASP resulted in increased student knowledge regardless of the length of the program attended.

暂无摘要。

The Essentials were initially adopted in 1944, and revised in 1955, 1969, and 1978. They were adopted by the American College of Radiology, the American Medical Association, The American Society of Radiologic Technologists, and the Program Review Committee of the Joint Review Committee on Education in Radiologic Technology. The Essentials, which represent the minimum accreditation standards for an educational program, are printed here in regular type face. The extent to which a program complies with these standards determines its accreditation status; the Essentials, therefore, include all requirements for which an accredited program is held accountable. The Guidelines, explanatory documents that clarify the Essentials, are printed in italic. Guidelines provide examples, etc., to assist in interpreting the Essentials.