Table 3 Summary of the outcomes
From: Clinical placement models for undergraduate health professions students: a scoping review
OUTCOMES OF CLINICAL PLACEMENT MODELS | ROLE EMERGING | SPOKE AND HUB | STUDENT-LED | PROJECT-BASED | INNOVATIVE | BLOCK | LICa | COMBINA-TION | COLLABORA-TION | DEUb | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
RELATIONSHIPS | Belonging to a team | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
Peer support among students | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
Helpful/Positive relationships between the clinical teacher and students | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
INFLUENCE | Benefiting the community | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||
Professional image promotion | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||
Influence of placement model on career outlook | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||
ENVIRONMENT | Consistency of placement and continuing patient care | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
Diversity of the placement environment | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||
Increased placement capacity | ✓ | ||||||||||
FACILITATION | Facilitation time and flexibility in placements | ✓ | |||||||||
Knowledge transfer opportunity | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||
Students receiving feedback | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||||
INPUTS | Need for adequate resource planning | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
Need for orientation to the clinical placement model | ✓ | ||||||||||
KNOWLEDGE SCORES | No effect on clinical knowledge scores | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
Improved knowledge scores | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||||
STUDENT PERCEPTIONS | Student perceived learning | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |||||||
Student satisfaction and positive experiences | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||||||
Student self-efficacy associated with improved outcomes | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |