↓ Skip to main content

Twenty years experiences of interprofessional education in Linköping – ground-breaking and sustainable

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Interprofessional Care, July 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Twenty years experiences of interprofessional education in Linköping – ground-breaking and sustainable
Published in
Journal of Interprofessional Care, July 2009
DOI 10.1080/13561820902728984
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margaretha Wilhelmsson, Staffan Pelling, Johnny Ludvigsson, Mats Hammar, Lars-Owe Dahlgren, Tomas Faresjö

Abstract

A pioneering and ground-breaking effort to organize interprofessional education (IPE) was initiated in 1986 at the Faculty of Health Sciences at Linkoping University in Sweden. The so-called "Linkoping IPE model" has now yielded practical experience and development of curricula for over 20 years. The basic idea of this model is that it is favorable for the development of students' own professional identity to meet other health and social professions already into their undergraduate studies. Interprofessional learning is a process over time that requires several integrated stages to gain interprofessional competence, i.e., the skills required to work together interprofessionally in practice. We believe that defined IPE modules early in the curriculum combined with student-training ward placement as the final module is an encouraging example of how to implement undergraduate IPE among health science students. It is strengthened by problem based learning (PBL) in small groups and student-centered learning. Based on these experiences, this paper aims to contribute to the discussion on how to implement and achieve the aims of IPE and to keep it sustainable. It is not a description of "how to do it" but rather a summarizing of our experiences for successful performance of IPE. The article presents how the Linkoping model was developed, the outcomes, experiences and some outlines for future challenges.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Ireland 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 126 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 25 19%
Student > Master 21 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 14%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Professor 7 5%
Other 29 22%
Unknown 23 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 38 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 23 17%
Social Sciences 18 14%
Psychology 9 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 2%
Other 15 11%
Unknown 26 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 March 2014.
All research outputs
#15,298,293
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Interprofessional Care
#876
of 1,150 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#93,467
of 110,135 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Interprofessional Care
#115
of 132 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,150 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 110,135 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 132 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.