Implication Statement If you want to offer your students an enjoyable and worthwhile interprofessional activity to learn about issues in community nutrition, your university can cook up these interprofessional culinary education workshops. Start with a few enthusiastic students from various health professional programs who can organize, promote, and lead. Include faculty and/or staff to support the students and apply for internal funding. Find workshop facilitators (e.g., chefs), and arrange for program evaluation. It is best to choose workshop topics and themes relevant to your local situation. Ensure workshops are structured to facilitate cooperative and experiential learning. Students will find these sessions informative, practical, and enjoyable.

Background: Education in social determinants of health (SDH) has become an important part of medical curricula, facilitated increasingly through students' experiential learning with communities. The Community and Workplace Centred Learning Experience (CWCLE) module of the University of Saskatchewan, Canada, aims to integrate and extend second-year medical students' attitudes, skills, and knowledge about SDH and community resources. We aimed to 1) Assess module impact on student achievement of learning objectives, 2) Assess module impact on student attitudes toward SDH, 3) Obtain feedback from community partners and students about their community experiences, and 4) Use feedback to collaboratively develop recommendations to enhance the CWCLE module. Methods: We used a mixed-method approach to combine quantitative data with stories and personal experiences. We developed an online survey for two cohorts of students after completing the module, evaluating students' perceived abilities to perform the module's learning objectives and attitudes towards SDH. We invited representatives from community agencies involved in the CWCLE module to participate in focus groups. We also held separate focus groups with students who participated in the online survey to elaborate on their survey comments.

The second and third take-home messages were revised. The wording of the first objective and the statement of the level of significance were adjusted for clarity. In the methods of the qualitative component of this study, we included sentences describing the steps for the data analysis and specifying the responsible researchers and their approaches to this component of the study. Two supplementary files were added to the article with copies of the interview guides used in the focus groups with medical students and community agency representatives. Also, we included the available demographics from the focus group participants. Please note that we did not capture further demographic data from participants given that we focussed on the module evaluation rather than study participants. In the results section, we revised the language used to describe the finding within the themes. The identified themes were representative of the discussions in the focus group; although, there were diverse opinions within some of these. This language helped us to describe our findings in some of the components of the module that were controversially discussed, for example, regarding the Community Plunge and the reciprocity themes. Also, we kept the last two paragraphs of this section given that it was one of our objectives to collaboratively develop recommendations with