Systematic review evaluates interprofessional education's impact on healthcare students, indicating structural characteristics alone may not account for effectiveness.
Aims: To evaluate the effectiveness of interprofessional education (IPE) for healthcare students and determine whether commonly assumed structural program characteristics explain between-study variability in intervention effectiveness. Design: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Data sources: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 2000 and May 2026. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed. Results: Twenty-four studies met the eligibility criteria. IPE significantly improved attitudes (Hedges' g = 0.406, 95% CI = 0.244–0.569), teamwork (g = 0.504, 95% CI = 0.330–0.678), competence (g = 0.571, 95% CI = 0.307–0.834), and knowledge (g = 0.703, 95% CI = 0.284–1.121). However, instructional approach, intervention duration, delivery modality, and the number of participating professions did not significantly explain between-study variability in intervention effectiveness. Conclusion: IPE effectively enhances collaborative competencies among healthcare students. However, structural program characteristics alone do not explain differences in intervention effectiveness, highlighting the need to focus on the educational processes underpinning effective interprofessional learning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ha-Young Park (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: