Mapping Complexity Lenses in Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice: A Scoping Review.
4 affiliations
- 1Department of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, Nelson Mandela University, Gqeberha, South Africa.
- 2Department of Human Nutrition and Dietetics, School of Health Care Sciences, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Ga-Rankuwa, South Africa.
- 3Department of Human Movement Science, Nelson Mandela University, Gqeberha, South Africa.
- 4Department of Occupational Therapy, School of Health Care Sciences, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Ga-Rankuwa, South Africa.
Abstract
Purpose
Complexity theory is increasingly applied in interprofessional education and collaborative practice (IPECP). Yet it is often unclear what researchers mean by "complexity", where it is positioned in the research process, how it informs design, analysis or interpretation, and what claims can reasonably be made from the evidence presented. This scoping review mapped how empirical IPECP studies use explicit-complexity lenses and synthesized the evidence into a moves-mechanisms-outcomes typology.Methods
A scoping review was conducted using JBI guidance and reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR. Peer-reviewed empirical IPECP studies were included if they specified an explicit-complexity lens and substantively operationalized complexity concepts in relation to IPECP. Data were charted and analyzed using descriptive counts and thematic analysis, then synthesized into a moves-mechanisms-outcomes typology.Results
Seventeen studies published between 2016 and 2026 met the inclusion criteria, with 10 published in 2023 or later. Complexity was most often positioned in conceptual framing and interpretation, with less consistent use as an analytic framework. Complexity-informed tools and resources were the most common move type (9/17), followed by system-level curriculum or micro-curriculum design (5/17). Across move types, adaptation/feedback, interdependence/networks, boundary dynamics and sensemaking/uncertainty formed the core mechanism set. Reported outcomes clustered at program/curriculum, team and student levels, with fewer studies reporting broader organizational or system-level change.Conclusion
Complexity was used more consistently to frame and interpret IPECP than to provide evidence of organizational or system-level change over time. The resulting moves-mechanisms-outcomes typology offers a flexible scaffold for making the links between complexity-informed activities, change processes and reported outcomes more explicit.
Related
- Effects of Interprofessional Collaborative Practice in Older Adults’ Hip Fractures Care: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
- Making collaboration explicit through collaborative, diagnostic, and intervention activities: foundations for interprofessional education
- Interprofessional collaborative learning among formal caregivers to older people in community-based health and social care—a systematic review
- Immersion 360, a european patient-partnered research project aimed at developing communication skills in paediatrics and raising awareness of interprofessional collaboration practice in partnership.
- Changes in students’ self-perceived interprofessional collaborative skills following participation in the student health service program
BibTeX
@article{hutton2026mapping,
title = {{Mapping Complexity Lenses in Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice: A Scoping Review.}},
author = {Tracey Hutton and Aayesha Kholvadia and Mashudu Manafe and Hanlie Pitout},
journal = {Advances in medical education and practice},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.2147/amep.s647535},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42974109},
note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Mapping Complexity Lenses in Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice: A Scoping Review.
AU - Tracey Hutton
AU - Aayesha Kholvadia
AU - Mashudu Manafe
AU - Hanlie Pitout
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/29
JO - Advances in medical education and practice
DO - 10.2147/amep.s647535
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42974109
AB - Purpose Complexity theory is increasingly applied in interprofessional education and collaborative practice (IPECP). Yet it is often unclear what researchers mean by "complexity", where it is positioned in the research process, how it informs design, analysis or interpretation, and what claims can reasonably be made from the evidence presented. This scoping review mapped how empirical IPECP studies use explicit-complexity lenses and synthesized the evidence into a moves-mechanisms-outcomes typology.Methods A scoping review was conducted using JBI guidance and reported in accordance with PRISMA-ScR. Peer-reviewed empirical IPECP studies were included if they specified an explicit-complexity lens and substantively operationalized complexity concepts in relation to IPECP. Data were charted and analyzed using descriptive counts and thematic analysis, then synthesized into a moves-mechanisms-outcomes typology.Results Seventeen studies published between 2016 and 2026 met the inclusion criteria, with 10 published in 2023 or later. Complexity was most often positioned in conceptual framing and interpretation, with less consistent use as an analytic framework. Complexity-informed tools and resources were the most common move type (9/17), followed by system-level curriculum or micro-curriculum design (5/17). Across move types, adaptation/feedback, interdependence/networks, boundary dynamics and sensemaking/uncertainty formed the core mechanism set. Reported outcomes clustered at program/curriculum, team and student levels, with fewer studies reporting broader organizational or system-level change.Conclusion Complexity was used more consistently to frame and interpret IPECP than to provide evidence of organizational or system-level change over time. The resulting moves-mechanisms-outcomes typology offers a flexible scaffold for making the links between complexity-informed activities, change processes and reported outcomes more explicit.
SN - 1179-7258
ER -