1.1 Community-based education (CBE) as a platform for IPE

Community-based education (CBE) is an experiential approach to education in which learning occurs in real-life community settings with students able to interact with real-life health and community challenges with a view to integrating theoretical knowledge with practice [5]. CBE has been identified as a powerful tool for facilitating IPE as it allows for collaborative learning, exposure to social determinants of health, as well as collaborative interactions [8,17].

At the University for Development Studies (UDS), community engagement has been institutionalized through two main programmes: The Third Trimester Field Practical Programme (TTFPP) and Community-Based Education and service (COBES) programme. TTFPP is a UDS -wide initiative in which students across disciplines, including health-related ones, are placed in community settings to undertake development projects [9]. Although TTFPP has a multidisciplinary composition, it has the potential for IPE. COBES, on the other hand, is a mono-professional programme for medical students only in UDS. However, with a focus on community immersion, service learning, and reflection, it has a high possibility for teamwork engagement in future.

Notably, the coexistence of various professions in the programme does not, in itself, amount to IPE. There is need to ensure planned educational design, facilitation, and alignment with IPE competency frameworks to ensure exposure to interdisciplinary results in meaningful IPE [6,13]. This is the basis on which the conceptual framework of the current study is founded.

1.2 Research gap and rationale

Whilst CBE has been explored in several contexts of high-income countries and some middle-income countries [5,17], there is a scarcity of empirical research that investigates the perceptions of existing CBE programmes in low-resource contexts as a basis for IPE. Specifically, there is a lack of understanding of how students and faculty perceive the potential for IPE between structurally distinct programmes, such as mono-professional or multidisciplinary CBE programmes.

With regards to the institutional context, CBE programmes have been established at the UDS for several decades. However, there has been a scarcity of systematic qualitative research that has examined the current role of CBE programmes in supporting or limiting the potential for IPE. The absence of such research has significant implications for curriculum development initiatives, faculty development programmes, and policy alignment.

This is particularly significant for UDS and several institutions in sub-Saharan Africa that may want to capitalize on existing educational infrastructures to support the advancement of IPE. The perceptions of stakeholders constitute a critical first step in this process.

1.3 Problem statement

IPE has been identified as a fundamental framework for the education of health professionals to work together effectively in a complex health system [19]. Yet the implementation of IPE in the curricula of health professions has been inconsistent, especially in resource-poor countries [16].

The UDS offers a number of CBE programmes that provide students with the opportunity for experiential learning in a community-based context. TTFPP is an example of an educational programme that involves students from a number of disciplines, while COBES is a mono-professional programme that only involves medical students. The long history of implementation of these programmes makes it difficult to determine whether they now promote IPE or only provide students with an interdisciplinary experience or simply have the potential for the integration of IPE.

There is limited empirical qualitative evidence examining how health professions students and faculty interpret existing CBE programmes in relation to IPE, including the challenges that constrain collaborative learning and the opportunities for deliberate curricular integration of IPE. In the absence of such context-specific insight, initiatives aimed at strengthening IPE within CBE risk conceptual and implementation misalignment. This therefore underscores the need to explore the perceptions, challenges, opportunities, and enabling conditions that shape the integration of interprofessional education within existing community-based education programmes.

1.4 Aim of the study

The aim of this study is to explore the perceptions, challenges, and opportunities associated with CBE programmes as platforms for promoting IPE.

1.5 Research questions

1. How do health professions students and faculty at UDS perceive CBE programmes in relation to IPE?
2. What challenges do students and faculty identify in utilizing TTFPP and COBES as platforms for IPE?
3. What opportunities do students and faculty perceive for strengthening IPE within existing CBE programmes at UDS?

1.6 Objectives of the study

1.7 Significance of the study

This study will contribute to the body of research on IPE by adding qualitative research findings that highlight the experience of CBE programmes in a low-resource university context. By differentiating between interdisciplinary exposure and structured interprofessional education (IPE), the study aims to provide conceptual clarity that can inform both research and educational practice. The study’s findings may also contribute to the body of knowledge for other health professions education institutions seeking to capitalize on existing CBE programmes to improve collaborative practice in resource-constrained contexts.

2.1 Study design and research paradigm

The research will be guided by a qualitative research paradigm with an underlying interpretive phenomenological approach [3,10]. This approach is appropriate for this study as it seeks to explore the way in which the experiences of the students in UDS are perceived as enabling, constraining, or potentially supporting IPE by the students and faculty. Unlike quantitative research, this approach will allow for the in-depth exploration of the realities of the participants’ perspectives, interpretations, and understandings within the UDS.

The research will be guided by an interpretivist paradigm, which asserts that reality is socially constructed through interaction, experience, and context [4,15]. This paradigm is appropriate for research as IPE is a concept that is inherently relational, based on the interactions of different people in different settings.

2.2 Study setting

The proposed study will be conducted within the context of UDS, located in the campus in Tamale, Ghana. UDS is a public university with an institutional mandate that prioritizes CBE. Two major CBE programmes that the university offers and which are pertinent to this proposed study include TTFPP, which is involved from students from diverse academic fields, and COBES, which involves only medical students.

2.3 Study population

The study population will comprise:

1. Final-year health professions students enrolled in medicine, nursing, midwifery, pharmacy, and nutrition who have completed either TTFPP or COBES.
2. Faculty members who have directly supervised, coordinated, or taught within TTFPP or COBES.

The students in their final year are chosen because they have gone through the entire process of learning in the community setting. The faculty is chosen because they are involved in the design, supervision, and facilitation of the learning process.

2.4 Inclusion and exclusion criteria

2.5 Sampling strategy and sample size

A purposive sampling approach will be used [12] to select participants with direct experience related to research questions. The sampling will target maximum variation based on profession and role to ensure a range of perspectives.

The proposed sample will consist of:

1. Around 20 final-year students, with a range of health professions
2. Around 10 faculty members, from a variety of health disciplines and roles

Sampling will proceed until a point of data saturation is reached [14], where no further conceptual insights are gained.

2.6 Recruitment procedures

This will be carried out by the principal investigator, working in collaboration with the administrators of the various departments. Information sheets will be disseminated through the departments, and the respondents will be requested to contact the team directly if they wish to participate. This strategy avoids coercion and maintains the voluntariness of the respondents.

2.7 Data collection

The data collection methods will include conducting semi-structured one-on-one interviews [3].

Interview guides will be developed separately for students and faculty to address their different roles. The interviews will be conducted by the principal investigator. The principal investigator is trained in conducting interviews.

The interview guide will have open-ended questions such as:

1. “Can you describe your experiences of working with students or professionals from other disciplines during community-based placements?”
2. “In what ways, if any, do you think TTFPP and COBES supports or limits IPE?”
3. “What opportunities do you see for strengthening IPE within these programmes?”

The interviews will take approximately 30–45 minutes and will be audio-recorded.

2.8 Piloting

The interview guide will be piloted with 2–3 participants who have similar characteristics to those in the population. This will ensure methodological rigor rather than notions of validity and reliability.

2.9 Data management and storage

All audio recordings will be transcribed literally by qualified research assistants under a confidentiality agreement. The data will be anonymized by removing any identifiable information. The data will be stored on computers that are password-protected, as well as encrypted storage media that is accessible only to the research team. The audio files will be erased once the transcription is complete.

2.10 Data analysis

Data will be analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, following the procedures outlined by Braun and Clarke [2]. NVivo (Version 18.0) will be used to support data organization and coding.

The analysis will proceed in several steps.

First, all transcripts will be read several times to allow familiarization with the data and the development of initial ideas. Notes will be taken during this stage to capture early impressions.

Second, initial codes will be developed from meaningful segments of the data related to the research questions. Coding will be carried out across the entire dataset.

Third, the codes will be grouped into potential themes by identifying patterns and relationships among them.

Fourth, the themes will be reviewed and refined to ensure they accurately represent the data and are clearly distinct.

Fifth, each theme will be clearly defined and named.

Finally, the findings will be presented in a narrative form, supported by selected excerpts from participants’ responses.

To enhance the trustworthiness of the analysis, a second researcher will independently code a portion of the transcripts, and any differences will be discussed and resolved.

2.11 Trustworthiness and rigor

Trustworthiness will be established through multiple complementary strategies grounded in accepted qualitative standards. The researcher will maintain a structured reflexive journal throughout data collection and analysis to document methodological decisions, evolving assumptions, and potential sources of bias, thereby strengthening confirmability. Regular peer debriefing with supervisors and co-authors will involve systematic scrutiny of coding processes, theme development, and interpretive claims to enhance analytic credibility. Member checking will be conducted by providing participants with concise summaries of the researchers’ interpretations to verify accuracy and ensure faithful representation of their perspectives. In addition, a comprehensive audit trail comprising raw data, coding schemes, analytic memos, and records of methodological decisions will be maintained to support dependability and transparency. Collectively, these procedures will enhance credibility, dependability, confirmability, and transferability of the findings.

2.12 Researcher reflexivity and positionality

The principal investigator is an educator in health professions and has an association with UDS [1]. It is important to be aware of this, especially considering the potential power dynamics and pre-existing assumptions. Reflexive journaling, peer debriefing, and documentation will be employed to reduce the impact of the investigator on the data collection and interpretation process.

2.13 Ethical considerations

This investigation has obtained its ethical approval from the Institutional Review Board of the UDS (Ref. no: UDS/RB/0178/25). Written informed consent shall be sought from each participant before the commencement of data collection. The study’s participation will be completely voluntary, and the participants will be allowed to exercise their right to withdraw at any time during the study without facing any negative consequences.

Confidentiality and anonymity will be maintained through the entire research process. Personal information will be taken out of all transcripts and datasets, and participants will be given individual codes. All the data will be protected and saved on password-secured computers as well as encrypted storage devices which only the research team can access. After the transcription and verification, the audio recordings will be erased.

The research will be carried out in compliance with internationally recognized ethical standards for research with human participants.