Original Publication
Open Access

Critical Synthesis Package: Index for Interdisciplinary Collaboration (IIC)

Published: August 24, 2015 | 10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10197

Included in this publication:

  • Critical Analysis of the Index for Interdisciplinary Collaboration (IIC).pdf
  • Index for Inderdisciplinary Collaboration (IIC).pdf

To view all publication components, extract (i.e., unzip) them from the downloaded .zip file.

Editor's Note: This publication predates our implementation of the Educational Summary Report in 2016 and thus displays a different format than newer publications. It is also part of a discontinued collection that focused on the presentation of health sciences education assessment tools and their reported validity data. 


This Critical Synthesis Package contains: (1) a Critical Analysis of the psychometric properties and the application to health science education of the Index for Interdisciplinary Collaboration (IIC), and (2) a copy of the IIC developed by Laura R. Bronstein, LCSWR, ACSW, PhD.

The IIC was designed to measure the perception of collaboration between social workers and other professionals working on an interdisciplinary team. The scale contains 42 items and five subscales: Interdependence, Newly Created Professional Activities, Flexibility, Collective Ownership of Goals, and Reflection on Process. The response options are presented along a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly agree, 5 = strongly disagree) for each item. Mean subscale scores and a total scale score can be calculated. Lower scores indicate higher levels of collaboration. Twelve items are reverse scored. An adapted version of the scale, the Modified Index for Interdisciplinary Collaboration (MIIC), was subsequently developed to survey a broader group of health care professionals working on hospice teams and has similar psychometric properties as the IIC. As a result of the rewording of the IIC to create the more broadly applicable MIIC, the MIIC is better for assessing interprofessional teamwork between individuals within the healthcare field, across multiple settings. Unfortunately, the IIC is limited to use with social workers and lacks sufficient theoretical and psychometric development. Although a factor analysis provided strong support for the IIC as a measure of the perception of interdisciplinary collaboration, the high degree of internal consistency suggests the measure may be best thought of as a global measure of perceptions of interdisciplinary collaboration among social workers, rather than one possessing subscales for separate dimensions. Further work is needed to confirm correlations between interdisciplinary collaboration and the factors thought to influence it.

Educational Objectives

  1. To describe the purpose and basic properties of the Index for Interdisciplinary Collaboration (IIC), including number of items and scales, and psychometric properties;
  2. To describe the application of the IIC to the field of health sciences education;
  3. To evaluate the relative strengths and weaknesses of the IIC; and
  4. To provide the IIC and supplemental materials to aid in its administration.

Author Information

  • Sheila Crow, PhD: University of Oklahoma School of Community Medicine

None to report.

None to report.


  1. Bronstein LR. Index of Interdisciplinary Collaboration. Social Work Research. 2002; 26(2): 113-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/swr/26.2.113.
  2. Institute of Medicine. (2003). Health professions education: A bridge to quality. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
  3. Parker-Oliver D, Bronstein LR, Kurzejeski L. Examining variables related to successful collaboration on the hospice team. 2005;30(4):279-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/13561820903163421.
  4. Oliver DP, Wittenberg-Lyles EM, Day M. Variances in perceptions of interdisciplinary collaboration by hospice staff. Journal of Palliative Care. 2006;22(4):275-280. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/13561820903163421.
  5. Parker-Oliver D, Wittenberg-Lyles EM, Day M. Measuring interdisciplinary perceptions of collaboration on hospice teams. American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine. 2007;24(1):49-53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049909106295283.
  6. Wittenberg-Lyles EM, Parker-Oliver D. The power of interdisciplinary collaboration in hospice. Progress in Palliative Care. 2007;15(1):6-12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/096992607X177764.
  7. Krusea RL, Parker D, Wittenberg-Lyle E, Demirisc G. Conducting the ACTIVE randomized trial in hospice care: Keys to success. Clin Trials. 2013;10(1):160-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1740774512461858.
  8. Kobayashi R, McAllister CA. Similarities and differences in perspectives on interdisciplinary collaboration among hospice team members. American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Medicine. 2014;31(8):825-832. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1049909113503706.
  9. Hong BY, Bainbridge D, Seow H. Measuring interprofessional collaboration between 2 palliative care teams: A pilot study in community-based settings. Journal of Hospice & Palliative Nursing. 2015;17(3):229-234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/NJH.0000000000000153.
  10. Norris J, Carpenter JG, Eaton J, Guo JW, Lassche M, Pett MA, Blumenthal DK. The development and validation of the Interprofessional Attitudes Scale: Assessing the interprofessional attitudes of students in the health professions. [published online ahead of print May 18, 2015]. Academic Medicine. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000000764.
  11. Interprofessional Education Collaborative Expert Panel. (2011). Core competencies for interprofessional collaborative practice: Report of an expert panel. Washington, D.C.: Interprofessional Education Collaborative.


Crow S. Critical Synthesis Package: Index for Interdisciplinary Collaboration (IIC). MedEdPORTAL. 2015;11:10197. https://doi.org/10.15766/mep_2374-8265.10197