Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS)
Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale · Also known as: Readiness for IPL, RIPLS Scale
The RIPLS is a 19-item self-report questionnaire designed to measure healthcare students' attitudes and readiness toward interprofessional learning and collaboration. Developed by Parsell and Bligh in 1999, it assesses three core dimensions of interprofessional readiness: teamwork and collaboration, professional identity, and recognition of roles and responsibilities across professions. The RIPLS is widely used in health professions education to evaluate the effectiveness of interprofessional education initiatives.
Read the full method
Sign in with a free account to read this section.
Method map
The neighbourhood of related methods — select a node to explore.
When to use it
The RIPLS is indicated for healthcare students (nursing, medicine, pharmacy, allied health, public health) before, during, or after participation in interprofessional education programs. It is used in program evaluation to assess whether IPE initiatives improve students' attitudes toward collaboration. The RIPLS is also suitable for measuring readiness in mixed-profession student cohorts, in simulations involving multiple disciplines, and in clinical placements with interprofessional teams. It is NOT appropriate for non-healthcare professions.
Strengths & limitations
- Robust psychometric foundation: well-established reliability (Cronbach's α >0.70 for all subscales) and validity across multiple healthcare professions and countries.
- Captures domain-specific readiness: three distinct subscales allow fine-grained assessment of teamwork attitudes, professional identity confidence, and role clarity.
- Practical administration: brief, paper-and-pencil format suitable for large-scale program evaluation in educational settings.
- Sensitive to intervention effects: demonstrates ability to detect meaningful changes in attitudes following IPE exposure, with effect sizes often in the small-to-medium range.
- Widely translated and validated: RIPLS exists in versions for multiple languages and healthcare contexts, enhancing cross-cultural applicability.
- Self-report bias: respondents may provide socially desirable answers, especially if they perceive the survey is evaluating their 'readiness' or appropriateness for a program.
- Cross-sectional associations only: while the RIPLS detects pre-post changes in studies, it does not prove that improved readiness leads to better interprofessional clinical outcomes or patient safety.
- Modest ceiling effects: some student cohorts (especially those already exposed to IPE) score near maximum, limiting discriminatory power in high-engagement settings.
- Professional identity subscale brevity: only 4 items; may not capture nuanced aspects of identity formation or disciplinary confidence in complex healthcare environments.
Frequently asked
Can students with low RIPLS scores be excluded from IPE programs?
No. The RIPLS measures attitudes, not competence or eligibility. Low baseline readiness is not a contraindication to IPE participation; in fact, such students may benefit most from IPE to shift attitudes. Exclusion would be ethically inappropriate and counterproductive.
What is considered a 'good' total RIPLS score?
No universal cutoff exists. Mean scores vary by context (e.g., nursing students average 68–75, medical students 72–80). Interpretation is most meaningful in change terms (pre-post gains of ≥10 points on total score suggest a meaningful intervention effect). Use published norms for your specific profession and country to contextualize results.
Can RIPLS be used with postgraduate or practicing clinicians?
Yes, but with caution. The scale was developed for and is most extensively validated in undergraduate healthcare students. Practicing clinicians' responses may be influenced by workplace culture and existing team dynamics rather than individual readiness. Use adapted instructions (e.g., 'readiness to engage in interprofessional continuing education') for clarity.
How do I account for missing responses on individual items?
If <10% of items are missing, calculate subscale scores using the available items and note the missing data. If ≥10% are missing, exclude the respondent from analysis, as the missing pattern may be non-random (e.g., students skipping items they disagree with). Imputation is not recommended for RIPLS due to its ordinal response scale.
Sources
- Parsell, G. & Bligh, J. (1999). The development of a questionnaire to assess the readiness of health care students for interprofessional learning (RIPLS). Med Educ 33(2): 95–100. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.1999.00298.x ↗
How to cite this page
ScholarGate. (2026, June 3). Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale. ScholarGate. https://scholargate.app/en/health-education/ripls
Which method?
Set this method beside its closest kin and read them side by side — the library lays the books on the table; the choice is yours.
- CLES+THealth Education↔ compare
- DASHHealth Education↔ compare
- IPCSHealth Education↔ compare
- PISHealth Education↔ compare