44 Chapter 3 In the UPE group, students wrote their health care plans on their own. In the IPE group, the health care plans were written by randomly paired medical and nursing students. In each session different pairs were assembled to create diversity among the collaboration partners and their input. The IPE group was placed in a different (class)room, separate from the UPE group. A researcher or research assistant supervised the students for identifying (non-) collaboration and was available to answer procedural questions. To ensure confidentiality, all treatment plans were filled out with research identification numbers. Students worked out their treatment plans in a word-document which was sent by the researcher, so that the their identity was secured in the file properties. To minimize students’ effort, all sessions of all different groups were scheduled in the regular time of the students’ educational program. Other educational obligations such as upcoming examinations were taken into account while planning the sessions. The scheduled time for the assignment was 45 minutes. To thank the students for their effort, cookies were offered to all students during each session. Assessment of the health care plans All health care plans drawn up by the students were first coded by a research assistant to blind the researchers towards the UPE and IPE group status. Subsequently the plans were assessed by comparing them with validated health care plans formulated by the same experts that were also involved in the case construction (Teuwen et al., 2020). For the four cases, experts agreed upon a list of actions that would be appropriate to carry out for such a patient. Each validated plan consisted of 20 (case 1, least complicated) to 30 items (case 4, most complicated). The items were scored as either present (1) or not present (0) in a student’s health care plan. All plans were assessed by the same person (author 1). Uncertainties in the identification of present or absent items were discussed with educational and clinical specialists after assessing the first 10 plans of each case. Subsequently the first 10 plans were reassessed by author 1 in consideration with the input of the educational and clinical specialists. After consistency was found in the assessment (intra-rater reliability of 1.00), all other plans were assessed. During the assessment of the health care plans it was sometimes necessary to fine-tune the boundaries to consider an item correct (1 point) or incorrect (0 points). If boundaries were adjusted, all care plans were reassessed for that specific item.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw