AI for interprofessional learning in hospitals

According to the PLOS One scoping review (Åhlund et al., published 7 August 2026), sustainable interprofessional learning in hospitals requires organizational structures that enable regular interaction, inclusive team cultures, and collaborative leadership. The PLOS One review found 2, 206 database hits and included 11 empirical studies after screening 1, 973 titles and abstracts and 33 full texts. The PLOS One authors conclude, “Sustainable IPL requires organizational structures that enable regular interaction among professionals, inclusive team cultures, and collaborative leadership.”

• 2206 articles were identified in the database search and, after screening 1, 973 titles and abstracts, 11 studies were included (PLOS One, 7 August 2026).
• Four of the 11 included studies were conducted in Australia (36%), and all included studies were published between 2009 and 2022 (PLOS One, 7 August 2026).
• Ten out of 11 studies used qualitative interview or focus group methods (91%), and sample sizes in the included studies ranged from 18 to 333 participants (PLOS One, 7 August 2026).
• The PLOS One review identifies three facilitators (socialization/familiarization, positive team climate, conducive organizational structures) and three barriers (lack of structural prerequisites, constrained interactions, non-conducive workplace culture) to IPL (PLOS One, 7 August 2026).

Answer: The PLOS One scoping review mapped facilitators and barriers to interprofessional learning involving nurses and physiotherapists in adult hospital settings. The PLOS One review followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework and a PRISMA-ScR workflow (Åhlund et al., PLOS One, 7 August 2026).

According to the PLOS One review (Åhlund et al., 7 August 2026), the authors searched PubMed, CINAHL, and Scopus from inception through July 2026, screened 1, 973 titles and abstracts, reviewed 33 full texts, and included 11 peer-reviewed empirical studies.

According to the PLOS One review (Åhlund et al., 7 August 2026), the included studies were predominantly qualitative (10/11, 91%), spanned 2009–2022, and had sample sizes ranging from 18 to 333, which framed the review’s evidence as rich in context but limited in scale.

Answer: Clinical researchers and educators should prioritize diagnosing structural and cultural blockers, then measure change with repeatable qualitative metrics. The PLOS One review (Åhlund et al., 7 August 2026) found organizational structures and co-location in 10 studies as key enablers of IPL, which implies leaders should first map team meeting frequency, shared spaces, and supervision practices.

According to the PLOS One review (Åhlund et al., 7 August 2026), workplace culture and past siloed education were common barriers; researchers should therefore code for cultural indicators (language, decision authority, meeting roles) when analyzing interviews or observation notes.

According to the PLOS One review (Åhlund et al., 7 August 2026), informal interactions and shadowing were recurrent facilitators; educators should operationalize these as measurable activities (number of joint rounds, shadowing hours) when designing IPL evaluations.

Answer: The PLOS One scoping review shows that diagnosing and improving interprofessional learning in hospitals requires both relational and structural data; AI-enabled qualitative research turns those data into measurable targets (Åhlund et al., PLOS One, 7 August 2026).

Clinical teams should begin by mapping current interaction points (shared spaces, joint rounds, supervision) and collecting focused qualitative data on role understanding and team climate, as recommended by the PLOS One review.

Evidano’s tools for transcription, thematic synthesis, and frequency/cross-segment analysis make those steps reproducible and auditable; for an overview see Evidano features.

To explore a hands-on pilot, Try Evidano for free.