Journal of Education and Health Promotion

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Assessment interprofessional collaboration (IPC), in community health‑care
setting usually has been neglected due to the lack of standard tools and assessors. In the present
study, the IPC checklist extracted from CANMEDS collaborator toolkit for teaching and assessing
the collaborator role is contextualized in Iranian community healthcare.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: According to CANMEDS Toolkit, an instrument extracted for IPC
assessment. Using Chavez’ toolkit, face and content validity were studied through two rounds of
Delphi by 12 experts of TUMS. Qualitative content validity including content validity index (CVI),
and content validity ratio (CVR) were assessed following watching a standard video about IPC by
them. Construct validity was studied by confirmatory factor analysis through LISREL software. To
check reliability, Cronbach’s alpha was calculated, and the other 12 experts completed checklists in
test–retest process with a 2‑week interval.
RESULTS: Face and qualitative content validity were confirmed using the Delphi method. CVI and
CVR were calculated as 0.61 and 0.86. In factor analysis, x2/df and RMSEA were calculated as
1.363 and 0.036; CFI, IFI, GFI, and AGFI were >0.7, and hence, the construct validity was confirmed.
Cronbach’s alpha was 0.953 for internal consistency. Test–retest was also calculated as 0.918
indicated to confirm reliability.
CONCLUSION: CANMEDS framework as an assessment tool for evaluating IPC in community health
setting is not only valid and reliable in the Iranian context but also it is easy to use for respondents
resulted from the rational number of items in community.

Abstract Background: Research is essential for development. In other words, scientific development
of each country can be evaluated by researchers’ scientific production. Understanding
and assessing the activities of researchers for planning and policy making is essential. The
significance of collaboration in the production of scientific publications in today’s complex world
where technology is everything is very apparent. Scientists realized that in order to get their work
wildly used and cited to by experts, they must collaborate. The collaboration among researchers
results in the development of scientific knowledge and hence, attainment of wider information.
The main objective of this research is to survey scientific production and collaboration rate in
philosophy and theoretical bases of medical library and information sciences in ISI, SCOPUS,
and Pubmed databases during 2001‑2010. Materials and Methods: This is a descriptive survey
and scientometrics methods were used for this research. Then data gathered via check list and
analyzed by the SPSS software. Collaboration rate was calculated according to the formula.
Results: Among the 294 related abstracts about philosophy, and theoretical bases of medical
library and information science in ISI, SCOPUS, and Pubmed databases during 2001‑2010, the
year 2007 with 45 articles has the most and the year 2003 with 16 articles has the least number
of related collaborative articles in this scope. “B. Hjorland” with eight collaborative articles had
the most one among Library and Information Sciences (LIS) professionals in ISI, SCOPUS,
and Pubmed. Journal of Documentation with 29 articles and 12 collaborative articles had the
most related articles. Medical library and information science challenges with 150 articles had
first place in number of articles. Results also show that the most elaborative country in terms
of collaboration point of view and number of articles was US. “University of Washington” and
“University Western Ontario” are the most elaborative affiliation from a collaboration point.
Conclusion: The average collaboration rate between researchers in this field during the years
studied is 0.25. The most completive reviewed articles are single authors that included 60.54%
of the whole articles. Only 30.46% of articles were provided with two or more than two authors.