Back

The experiences, challenges, and enablers for promoting interprofessional education among medical students: A Scoping Review

Assibi, M. A.; Abugri, B. A.; Karikari, P. A. A.; Ziblim, S.-D.; Mogre, V.

2025-08-15 medical education
10.1101/2025.08.13.25333643 medRxiv
Show abstract

ObjectiveThis scoping review maps the literature on the experiences, challenges, and enablers of interprofessional education among medical students. MethodsA scoping review methodology based on the Arksey and OMalley framework of 2005 was conducted. The search focused on peer-reviewed articles published in English between 2014 and 2024 of various designs (Qualitative, Quantitative and mixed methods). A systematic search of the literature was made through databases like PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar using terms like "Interprofessional Education," "medical students," "experiences," "challenges," and "enablers." ResultsAfter reviewing 1,500 articles, 11 studies were included, revealing that interprofessional education enhances teamwork and communication through simulation, clinical placements, and peer learning. However, challenges such as scheduling conflicts, resource limitations, and faculty unpreparedness hinder implementation. Effective enablers, including faculty training, structured feedback, and institutional commitment, support engagement and sustainability. ConclusionInterprofessional education is a crucial tool for preparing medical students to practice collaboratively in healthcare. With the adoption of such established and sustainable IPE programs, the future health care providers will be well equipped to deliver quality, collaborative patient care. Further studies are needed to investigate long-term outcomes of IPE and how it impacts patient care across various settings of health care.

Published in PLOS ONE (predicted rank #2) · training set

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.