↓ Skip to main content

How to think about interprofessional competence: A metacognitive model

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Interprofessional Care, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
39 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 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
How to think about interprofessional competence: A metacognitive model
Published in
Journal of Interprofessional Care, January 2012
DOI 10.3109/13561820.2011.644644
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margaretha Wilhelmsson, Staffan Pelling, Lars Uhlin, Lars Owe Dahlgren, Tomas Faresjö, Kenneth Forslund

Abstract

Different professions meet and work together in teams every day in health and social care. To identify and deliver the best quality of care for the patient, teamwork should be both professionally and interprofessionally competent. How can enhanced education prepare teamworkers to be both professionally and interprofessionally competent? To achieve interprofessional skills and design effective interprofessional curricula, there is a need for metacognitive frameworks focusing on the relationship between theories and the problem-solving process as well as the structure and content of professional competence. The aim of this article is to discuss the need for shared metacognitive structures/models as a tool for securing successful interprofessional learning and developing personal, professional and interprofessional competence to improve the quality of care. A metacognitive model for interprofessional education and practice is presented in this article. This model has been developed as a tool for analyzing professional competence on three levels: individual, team and organization. The model comprises seven basic components of professional competence and the way they are related and interact. Examples of how this metacognitive model can be used in the early, middle and late stages in interprofessional education are given.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Czechia 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Unknown 120 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 17 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 10%
Other 35 28%
Unknown 14 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 32 26%
Social Sciences 25 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 14%
Psychology 10 8%
Computer Science 4 3%
Other 19 15%
Unknown 18 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 19 March 2012.
All research outputs
#14,142,336
of 22,661,413 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Interprofessional Care
#801
of 1,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#152,064
of 243,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Interprofessional Care
#7
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,661,413 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,149 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 26th percentile – i.e., 26% 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 243,373 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.