Where is the voice of lived experience in interprofessional education? A scoping review.
Saved in:
| Title: | Where is the voice of lived experience in interprofessional education? A scoping review. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Anderson, ES (AUTHOR), Bennett-Weston, A (AUTHOR), Ford, JS (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Interprofessional Care. May/Jun2026, Vol. 40 Issue 3, p468-480. 13p. |
| Subjects: | Interdisciplinary education, Curriculum, Community support, Medical quality control, Interprofessional relations, Human services programs, CINAHL database, Families, Descriptive statistics, Learning, Caregivers, Systematic reviews, MEDLINE, Patient-professional relations, Curriculum planning, Conceptual structures, Quality assurance, Social support, Data analysis software, Patient participation, Health care teams, ERIC (Information retrieval system) |
| Abstract: | The main goal of interprofessional education (IPE) is to improve services and the quality of care for patients, their families, and communities. Enabling different professional learners, or others with relevant care roles, to learn together, is expected to advance care delivery. For both pre and post-registration learning, it therefore follows that listening to and working with service users is essential to underpin interprofessional learning. We completed a scoping review to identify how service users were involved in the design, delivery, and management of IPE. We searched the literature from the rise of curriculum alignment for IPE in 2000 to 2023, we identified 13 papers. Our analysis of these 13 papers showed that pre-registration students appreciated learning from service users' experiences of care but often the user input was not combined with a deeper appreciation for what this means for effective interprofessional practice. Post-qualified clinical teams involved service users in the design and development of services, often with care and support. Theoretical understandings about service user involvement in IPE for how learning took place or to explain the concepts involved, were limited. Where service users were involved in IPE, there was often little support with little attention to the skills of interprofessional facilitation. Theoretically informed research on the involvement of the service users voice in IPE requires further consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Interprofessional Care is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | The main goal of interprofessional education (IPE) is to improve services and the quality of care for patients, their families, and communities. Enabling different professional learners, or others with relevant care roles, to learn together, is expected to advance care delivery. For both pre and post-registration learning, it therefore follows that listening to and working with service users is essential to underpin interprofessional learning. We completed a scoping review to identify how service users were involved in the design, delivery, and management of IPE. We searched the literature from the rise of curriculum alignment for IPE in 2000 to 2023, we identified 13 papers. Our analysis of these 13 papers showed that pre-registration students appreciated learning from service users' experiences of care but often the user input was not combined with a deeper appreciation for what this means for effective interprofessional practice. Post-qualified clinical teams involved service users in the design and development of services, often with care and support. Theoretical understandings about service user involvement in IPE for how learning took place or to explain the concepts involved, were limited. Where service users were involved in IPE, there was often little support with little attention to the skills of interprofessional facilitation. Theoretically informed research on the involvement of the service users voice in IPE requires further consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 13561820 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/13561820.2025.2452977 |
