↓ Skip to main content

A situation analysis of inter-professional education and practice for ethics and professionalism training at Makerere University College of Health Sciences

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
75 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
A situation analysis of inter-professional education and practice for ethics and professionalism training at Makerere University College of Health Sciences
Published in
BMC Research Notes, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1577-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Pauline Byakika-Kibwika, Annet Kutesa, Rhona Baingana, Christine Muhumuza, Freddy Eric Kitutu, Catherine Mwesigwa, Rose Nabirye Chalo, Nelson K. Sewankambo

Abstract

Students at Makerere University College of Health Sciences (MakCHS) are introduced to ethics and professionalism using the inter-professional education (IPE) model. Ethics and professionalism should be running themes throughout succeeding years of study during which students are expected to develop qualities and skills for future inter-professional practice (IPP). We performed a situation analysis of IPE and IPP among students and teaching health professionals at MakCHS to guide development of a relevant training curriculum of ethics and professionalism. A cross sectional study with quantitative and qualitative methods which included questionnaires, focus group discussions and key informant interviews. We interviewed 236 undergraduate students (148, 63 % male) and 32 teaching health professionals (25, 78 % male). Two hundred fifteen (91 %) students indicated they had joint learning activities with students of other professions and 166 (70 %) stated there was benefit in having an IPE model training curriculum. Most students (140, 59 %) strongly agreed that learning with other students will make them more effective members of the health team. Whereas the respondents reported inter professionalism as being well articulated in their course curricula, more than half said IPE is only implemented in the pre-clinical years of study. They noted that IPE and IPP concepts were not well programmed, health professionals engaged in teaching had poor attitudes towards IPE and IPP, there were limited numbers of skilled health care workers to implement IPP and there was poor communication between students and teaching health professionals. Majority of teaching health professionals noted challenges in implementation of IPE such as poor coordination and large student population and major factors influencing ethics and professionalism in healthcare such as limited government support, low pay for the health care workers, disrespect and lack of appreciation of the health workers by the public. Our findings demonstrate that IPE, IPP, ethics and professionalism are not emphasized in the clinical years of study at MakCHS. We recommend increased sensitization on the concepts of IPE and IPP plus enhanced mentorship for both students and teaching health professionals. Innovative strategies of implementation of IPE and IPP for training in ethics and professionalism must be introduced.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Bachelor 8 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 11%
Lecturer 7 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 9%
Other 18 24%
Unknown 17 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 16 21%
Social Sciences 5 7%
Psychology 4 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 5%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 16 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 03 November 2015.
All research outputs
#13,375,015
of 22,831,537 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#1,658
of 4,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,269
of 283,595 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#65
of 180 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,831,537 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
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 283,595 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 180 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 62% of its contemporaries.