Background Key trends in interprofessional research: A - - PDF document

B10i: Key Trends in IP Research: A Macrosociological Analysis from 1970 to 2010 Laura Bekes

Collaborating Across Borders IV: Transformative Change from the Classroom to Practice June 12 – 14, 2013 | Vancouver, BC

Key trends in interprofessional research: A Macrosociological analysis from 1970 to 2010

Laura Bekes

• n behalf of

Scott Reeves, Elise Paradis

University of California, San Francisco

Background

• Increasing need for effective interprofessional collaboration

(e.g. quality/safety, chronic illnesses, workforce shortages)

• Expansion of interprofessional education and practice

activities – globally

• Growth of interprofessional research

Questions

• How has the IP field grown over time?
• How wide is its reach?
• Which concepts and keywords have researchers used over

time?

Methods

• Macro-sociology
• Focus on international process of legitimation:
• How novel ideas emerge and become ‘institutionalized’

(e.g. taken for granted)

Examples

• Expansion of higher education around the world (Frank &

Meyer, 2007)

• Importance of science (Drori et al 2003)
• Rise of the human rights (Meyer et al 2010)
• Growth of obesity-related knowledge production (Paradis,

2011)

Theoretical Lens

• Pierre Bourdieu
• Focus on power struggles within the academic domain
• Use of Bourdieu’s concepts of field, capital and symbolic

struggle to illuminate process of academic status and legitimacy

B10i: Key Trends in IP Research: A Macrosociological Analysis from 1970 to 2010 Laura Bekes

Collaborating Across Borders IV: Transformative Change from the Classroom to Practice June 12 – 14, 2013 | Vancouver, BC

Focus

1. Investigate the growth of interprofessional research and discuss its representation in various publications 2. Document the evolution of language use in the interprofessional literature. 3. Explore how interprofessional research as a field trying to establish academic legitimacy

Data Collection

• PubMed search of interprofessional-related articles
• 1970-2010 time period
• Key terms – interprofessional*, inter-professional*, multi-

professional*, multiprofessional*, multidisciplinar*, multi- disciplinar*, interdisciplinar*

• Yield: 100,488 articles, from 1970-2010

Analysis

• 436 keywords were identified using key texts in the IP literature;

202 countries covered

• Data were input into a Python-language computer program that

coded the titles of all 100,488 articles into a binary matrix

(0=keyword not present; 1=keyword present)

• Data were aggregated and mapped over time using SPSS 17

Findings

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Articles as a % of PubMed

• No. of Articles
• Fig. 1: IP Articles in and as a Percent of PubMed, 1970‐2010

Number of Articles Articles as %PubMed 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

• No. of Journals
• Fig. 2: Number of Journals that Published IP Research, 1970‐2010

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 5 10 15 20 25 30 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

• No. of Countries

% of Sample

• Fig. 3: Internationalization of IP Research, 1970‐2010

Countries other than US United States (US)

• No. of Countries

B10i: Key Trends in IP Research: A Macrosociological Analysis from 1970 to 2010 Laura Bekes

Collaborating Across Borders IV: Transformative Change from the Classroom to Practice June 12 – 14, 2013 | Vancouver, BC

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

% of Sample

• Fig. 4: Interprofessional Key Terms in IP Research, 1970‐2010

Interdisciplinar Interprofessional Multidisciplinar 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

% of Sample

• Fig. 5: Managerial Rhetoric in IP Publications, 1970‐2010

Manage/managing Improve/improving Outcome 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

% of Sample

• Fig. 6: Psychometric Approaches in IP Research, 1970‐2010

Assess Evaluate/evaluation Outcome 5 10 15 20 25 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

% of Sample

• Fig. 7: Individual Actors in IP Publications, 1970‐2010

Nurse Staff Student Physician/doctor/GP Group Processes 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

% of Sample

• Fig. 8: Emerging Directions in IP Publications, 1970‐2010

Care/caring Patient Health 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

• Fig. 9: Trends in IP Scholarship, 1970‐2010

Review Qualitative Quantitative Mixed Methods

B10i: Key Trends in IP Research: A Macrosociological Analysis from 1970 to 2010 Laura Bekes

Collaborating Across Borders IV: Transformative Change from the Classroom to Practice June 12 – 14, 2013 | Vancouver, BC

Discussion

• Continuous growth of interprofessional – research

publications

• ‘Interprofessional’ more common since 2000
• Rise of management rhetoric & psychometrics: focus

mirrors broader trends

• Decline in individual professions
• Rise in the use of the terms ‘care/caring’ and ‘patient’ –

patient advocacy, user involvement and patient-centered care

• Bourdieu’s framework – interprofessional research

process of legitimization:

• High impact journals
• International reach
• Symbolic struggle:
• Terminological issues – ‘interprofessional’,

‘interdisciplinary’, ‘multidisciplinary’

• Psychometric paradigm – metrics and assessment

Questions?

Paradis E & Reeves S (forthcoming) Key trends in interprofessional research: a macrosociological analysis from 1970 to 2010. J Interprof Care.

DOI: 10.3109/13561820.2012.719943 http://informahealthcare.com/toc/jic/0/0

Scott.Reeves@ucsf.edu Elise.Paradis@ucsf.edu