Interprofessional collaboration through self- assessment and structured feedback: An exploratory mixed-methods study
This mixed-methods study reveals that while medical and allied health students overestimated their interprofessional competence, structured tutor feedback following online simulations effectively identified and remedied specific behavioral gaps in collaborative performance.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
In modern healthcare, the complexity of patient needs has grown far beyond what any single doctor or therapist can handle alone. As populations age and conditions become more intertwined, the solution often lies in teams of specialists working together seamlessly. This concept, known as interprofessional collaboration, requires professionals from different fields—such as medicine, physical therapy, and social work—to communicate effectively, share decision-making, and respect each other's unique expertise. However, teaching this skill is difficult. It is not just about knowing facts; it is about how people behave, listen, and adapt in real-time. A major hurdle in improving these skills is that people are often poor judges of their own abilities. They may believe they are excellent team players while missing critical moments where they failed to listen or collaborate. Understanding whether training actually changes behavior, rather than just boosting confidence, is essential for building better healthcare systems.
To explore this gap between feeling capable and actually performing well, researchers from universities in Belgium, the Philippines, and Kenya brought together medical and allied health students for a unique online experiment. They utilized a program called Collaborative Online International Learning, which connected students from three different continents to work on a shared case. The scenario involved a four-year-old boy named Jonas, who has Down syndrome and requires care from a wide network of people, including his parents, foster parents, teachers, and various therapists. The students were assigned specific roles within this network, such as a speech therapist, a doctor, or a parent, and were tasked with holding a virtual meeting to create a care plan for Jonas. The goal was to see if a structured educational program could help these students move from isolated thinking to genuine teamwork.
Before the simulation began, the students were asked to rate their own confidence in working with other professionals. The results were strikingly high; on a scale of one to ten, the average scores ranged from 7.70 to 9.09. The students felt very sure of their ability to collaborate, communicate respectfully, and understand their roles. However, when trained tutors watched the actual meetings unfold, the picture looked quite different. The tutors used a specific checklist to observe behaviors like how the group handled conflict, whether everyone's voice was heard, and if they made decisions together. In the first round of observations, nearly half of the recorded behaviors were rated as negative. The tutors noted that students often stuck to their own professional perspectives, forgot to include the parents in the conversation, or used confusing medical jargon that excluded the family. The students' high confidence did not match the reality of their interactions.
The turning point came when the tutors paused the meeting after 10–15 minutes to provide structured feedback. They pointed out specific moments where the group had missed an opportunity to collaborate, such as failing to clarify who was leading the discussion or not asking the parents for their input. Following this guidance, the tutors continued to observe the ongoing session. The change was immediate and measurable. In the subsequent observations, 85 percent of the recorded behaviors showed improvement across all areas of teamwork. The students began to introduce themselves clearly, invited the parents to speak, and used simpler language to explain medical concepts. They shifted from a group of individuals working in parallel to a cohesive unit focused on the child and family. The feedback acted as a mirror, allowing the students to see the gaps between their intentions and their actions.
This study suggests that while online simulations can effectively teach the mechanics of teamwork, the presence of guided feedback is what drives real behavioral change. The researchers found that without this external perspective, students remained unaware of their shortcomings, trapped in a cycle of overconfidence. The experiment demonstrated that when students are given clear, specific advice on how to improve their communication and role clarity, they can quickly adapt and become more effective collaborators. While the study was conducted in a simulated environment and involved students rather than practicing professionals, the results highlight a crucial lesson for medical education: feeling ready is not the same as being ready. True competence in teamwork requires not just training, but the willingness to look at one's own performance through the eyes of others and make concrete adjustments.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.