The study had a mixed design with presentation format (mono- vs. inter-professional) as between-group factor) and pre/post-comparison as within-group factor. Attitude toward interprofessional interaction and learning, evaluation of the entertaining and illustrative character of the video, attitude toward physicians and psychologists, importance of IPC, evaluation of psychological treatment support, and knowledge acquisition served as dependent variables.
288 participants followed a link that was distributed by the mailing list of the online video platform Sectio chirurgica (www.sectio-chirurgica.de, 34). 202 of them completed the questionnaire, but 60 failed the manipulation check and two were not medical students. Data of 140 participants thus remained for analysis: 74 participants were in the mono-professional condition (40 females, 34 males) and 66 (41 females, 25 males) in the inter-professional condition (see Figure 1). The participants’ medical training ranged between the first and the tenth semesters, with most of the participants in earlier semesters (M = 4.15; SD = 2.64). Their mean age was 23.13 years old (SD = 3.53).
The study was conducted online in January, 2020. Prior to the video presentation participants completed a demographic questionnaire that asked for their education history, age, and gender. Participants’ professional identification (35), attitude toward psychological and medical treatment, and rating of interprofessional learning and interaction (36,37, 38) were also measured. Participants then watched a shortened episode from the medical online video platform Sectio chirurgica about a DBS surgical procedure, but the video differed in the two conditions. In the mono-professional condition the video showed the essential elements of the procedure and two physicians talking about DBS for PD. In the inter-professional condition, a psychologist’s comments were additionally included. After watching the video, participants again filled in questionnaires on their attitude toward psychological and medical treatment and their rating of interprofessional learning and interaction. They were also asked to evaluate the video’s entertainment value and its illustration of IPC. Then participants took a knowledge test. Finally, participants were informed about the aim of the study and the manipulation that was applied.
Material and Measurements
The videos were shortened versions of a 120-minute full episode, shortened to 8:22 minutes for the mono-professional condition and to 13:08 minutes for the inter-professional version. The inter-professional condition additionally presented a 4:44- minute interview with a psychologist conducted by a medical doctor.
Attitude toward IPC
Attitudes toward IPC interaction and learning were measured by the IP-interaction and IP-learning subscales (36–38) from the University of the West of England Interprofessional Questionnaire (UWE-IP). Both subscales comprised nine items each that were measured on 5-point Likert scales. Reliability of these scales were Cronbach’s alpha = 0.712 (IP-interaction) and Cronbach’s alpha = 0.823 (IP-learning) respectively.
Evaluation of the video
The participants’ evaluation of the video was measured by two scales. The first scale rated the entertainment value of the video with six items. Reliability of this scale was Cronbach’s alpha = 0.824. The second scale rated how well the video illustrated IPC with three items with a reliability of Cronbach’s alpha = 0.889. All items were measured on 5-point Likert scales (see Table 1).
Attitude toward the professions
Participants’ attitudes toward the medical and psychological professions was measured with an adapted version of Marteau, Dormandy, and Michie’s scale (39) with four items on 7-point Likert scales, with a separate assessment of the medical and the psychological professions (see Table 2). Reliability of this scale was Cronbach’s alpha = 0.948.
Evaluation of the importance of IPC
A scale was created to evaluate the importance of IPC for DBS. This scale contained six items on a 5-point Likert scale (see Table 3). Reliability of this scale was Cronbach’s alpha = 0.815.
Evaluation of psychological support during treatment
A scale with four items was created to evaluate the psychological support during treatment. Reliability of these scales were Cronbach’s alpha = 0.675. Due to this low level of reliability, we did not include this scale in the analysis. Hypothesis 5 could therefore not be tested.
In the knowledge test the participants had to judge seven statements as correct or incorrect. In addition, they were asked two multiple choice questions (see Table 4). For each question the level of confidence for each answer was also rated on a scale ranging from 1 (very unconfident) to 6 (very confident). To reduce the probability of guessing, a balanced negative marking method was used (40) where each answer was analyzed for correctness (+1 = correct answer; -1 = wrong answer) and multiplied with the confidence score.
We performed data analysis using IBM SPSS 22 for Windows (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). Internal consistency of all scales was determined by calculating Cronbach’s alpha (α). We tested age distribution with a t-test and gender distribution with a chi-squared test. To test the assumptions of Hypotheses 1 and 3, mixed-design ANOVAs with condition as between-group factor and the pre/post-comparison as within-group factor were calculated. To test Hypotheses 2 and 4, as well as for the open research question, independent samples t-tests were used.
All data are reported as means (M) ± standard deviations (SD), unless otherwise noted. The level of significance was set at p < 0.050. Cohen’s d and partial eta squared (η2p) are reported as indicators of effect size.
This research was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study had full approval by the ethics committee of the Leibniz-Institut für Wissensmedien (approval number: LEK 2017/035). All participants took part voluntarily and anonymously. They gave written informed consent and were informed about privacy protection, their right to terminate participation at any time without disadvantages, and about the general purpose of the study.