Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Excerpt from the revised coding guidelines with anchor examples
| Name of the Category | Definition | Application of the category. Category is coded if the following aspects are mentioned: | Category is not coded if the following aspects are mentioned | Anchor examples |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Personal subjective experience of collaboration in IP case development | Based on own experience of collaboration | Is not coded if it concerns findings on factors for case development. If so, then use subcategories under findings on factors for case development | |
| Personal subjective experience of working in a group with other case developers. Also with a focus on changes over time, as well as own role in the group |
| Is not coded if it concerns findings on factors for case development. If so, then use subcategories under findings on factors for case development |
|
| Subjective experience of what was challenging in the collaboration | Challenging assessed aspects of collaboration with the case development team | Challenges of IP cases in general. Then coding under “Definitions/Main characteristics of IP case” | „Ich hätte jetzt vielleicht nicht die Formulierung ‚nicht so zielführend’ verwendet, aber ich würde sagen natürlich, dass es auch Probleme gab oder Schwierigkeiten, Abstriche, die man machen muss. Die lagen in der Regel im Bereich der Kompromisse. […]“Interview_IP_Fallkonzeption_04: 29 - 29 (0) |
| Positive experiences in the collaboration with the other people in the team | Positive experiences through interaction with the other case developers = psycho-emotional component of the work |
| „Gab es positive Erfahrungen während der interprofessionellen Fallentwicklung? Im Zusammenhang mit der Zusammenarbeit. - Positiv im Sinne von, ich habe mich mit den Kollegen sehr gut verstanden, vertragen (lacht). Und es war jedenfalls in den meisten Fällen ein sehr schönes und harmonisches Miteinander. […]“ Interview_IP_Fallkonzeption_07 #00:18:02 6# |
Professional experiences of the interviewees
| Interviewees | Experience in IP Practice | Experience in Teaching or Curriculum Development | Experience in IPE | Experience in Case Development | Experience in Designing Digital Teaching Formats |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IP_01 | extensive | 15 years | extensive | extensive | moderate |
| IP_02 | moderate | < 5 years | extensive | extensive | - |
| IP_03 | - | 15 | 10 years | - | 10 years |
| IP_04 | >10 | 10 years | < 1 year | moderate | little experience |
| IP_05 | very extensive | 5–15 years | extensive | moderate | moderate |
| IP_06 | moderate | 5–15 years | very extensive | very extensive | very extensive |
| IP_07 | 10 years | extensive | very extensive | very extensive | very extensive |
Excerpt from the semi-structured interview guide
| Block 1: Personal understanding of interprofessional virtual cases |
| Prompt: What do you personally think constitutes an interprofessional case? |
| Block 2: Personal experience of collaboration in interprofessional case development |
| Prompt: How did you personally experience the collaboration during interprofessional case development? |
| Block 3: Changes over time |
| Prompt: When thinking about the case development(s), did anything change over time? If so, how? |
| Block 4: Insights for future case developments |
| Prompt: What would you keep the same or do differently in future interprofessional case developments? |
| Block 5: Other |
| Prompt: Is there anything you would like to add that we haven't talked about yet? |
| Block 6: Sociodemographic data |
| Final Questions: I have a few questions about your teaching and case development experience. |
Recommendations for IP VP case development
| Step 1: Preparation | Step 2: Case development and production | Step 3: Follow-up/reflection | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Content aspects |
|
|
|
| Structural aspects |
|
|
|
| Working methods/group processes |
|
|
|