The Effectiveness of Interprofessional Education for Healthcare Students: Do Structural Program Characteristics Matter? A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

Abstract Aims: To evaluate the effectiveness of interprofessional education (IPE) for healthcare students and determine whether commonly assumed structural program characteristics explain between-study variability in intervention effectiveness. Design: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Data sources: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 2000 and May 2026. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed. Results: Twenty-four studies met the eligibility criteria. IPE significantly improved attitudes (Hedges' g = 0.406, 95% CI = 0.244–0.569), teamwork (g = 0.504, 95% CI = 0.330–0.678), competence (g = 0.571, 95% CI = 0.307–0.834), and knowledge (g = 0.703, 95% CI = 0.284–1.121). However, instructional approach, intervention duration, delivery modality, and the number of participating professions did not significantly explain between-study variability in intervention effectiveness. Conclusion: IPE effectively enhances collaborative competencies among healthcare students. However, structural program characteristics alone do not explain differences in intervention effectiveness, highlighting the need to focus on the educational processes underpinning effective interprofessional learning.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Open Science Framework
Published
2026-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/8n7dg
Primary Topic
Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Effectiveness of Interprofessional Education for Healthcare Students: Do Structural Program Characteristics Matter? A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

Ha-Young Park
Open Science Framework
Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
article

The Effectiveness of Interprofessional Education for Healthcare Students: Do Structural Program Characteristics Matter? A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Meta-Regression

Ha-Young Park
article en

Abstract

Abstract Aims: To evaluate the effectiveness of interprofessional education (IPE) for healthcare students and determine whether commonly assumed structural program characteristics explain between-study variability in intervention effectiveness. Design: Systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression. Data sources: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies published between January 2000 and May 2026. Review methods: Randomized controlled trials and quasi-experimental studies were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. Random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed. Results: Twenty-four studies met the eligibility criteria. IPE significantly improved attitudes (Hedges' g = 0.406, 95% CI = 0.244–0.569), teamwork (g = 0.504, 95% CI = 0.330–0.678), competence (g = 0.571, 95% CI = 0.307–0.834), and knowledge (g = 0.703, 95% CI = 0.284–1.121). However, instructional approach, intervention duration, delivery modality, and the number of participating professions did not significantly explain between-study variability in intervention effectiveness. Conclusion: IPE effectively enhances collaborative competencies among healthcare students. However, structural program characteristics alone do not explain differences in intervention effectiveness, highlighting the need to focus on the educational processes underpinning effective interprofessional learning.

Open Science Framework
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Interprofessional Education and Collaboration
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.