Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32928199›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2020

What works, why and how? A scoping review and logic model of rural clinical placements for allied health students.

Anna Moran, Susan Nancarrow, Catherine Cosgrave, Anna Griffith, Rhiannon Memery

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Exploring Competencies and Skills of Australian Rural Psychologists.The Australian journal of rural health · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Anna MoranDepartment of Rural Health, 49 Graham St, Shepparton, VIC, 3630, Australia. Anna.moran@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5999-0761
Susan NancarrowSouthern Cross University, Gold Coast Airport, Terminal Dr, Bilinga, QLD, 4225, Australia.
Catherine CosgraveDepartment of Rural Health, 49 Graham St, Shepparton, VIC, 3630, Australia.
Anna GriffithAlbury Wodonga Health, Borella Road, Albury, NSW, 2640, Australia.
Rhiannon MemeryServices for Austalian Rural and Remote Allied Health (SARRAH), Unit 4/17 Napier Close, Deakin, ACT, 2600, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAllied health services are core to the improvement in health outcomes for remote and rural residents. Substantial infrastructure has been put into place to facilitate rural work-ready allied health practitioners, yet it is difficult to understand or measure how successful this is and how it is facilitated.

methodsA scoping review and thematic synthesis of the literature using program logic was undertaken to identify and describe the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes of successful models of rural clinical placements for allied health students. This involved all empirical literature examining models of regional, rural and remote clinical placements for allied health students between 1995 and 2019.

resultsA total of 292 articles were identified; however, after removal of duplicates and article screening, 18 were included in the final synthesis. Australian papers dominated the evidence base (n = 11). Drivers for rural allied health clinical placements include: attracting allied health students to the rural workforce; increasing the number of allied health clinical placements available; exposing students to and providing skills in rural and interprofessional practice; and improving access to allied health services in rural areas. Depending on the placement model, a number of key mechanisms were identified that facilitated realisation of these drivers and therefore the success of the model. These included: support for students; engagement, consultation and partnership with key stakeholders and organisations; and regional coordination, infrastructure and support. Placement success was measured in terms of student, rural, community and/or program outcomes. Although the strength and quality of the evidence was found to be low, there is a trend for placements to be more successful when the driver for the placement is specifically reflected in the structure of the placement model and outcomes measured. This was seen most effectively in placement models that were driven by the need to meet rural community needs and upskill students in interprofessional rural practice.

conclusionThis study identifies the factors that can be manipulated to ensure more successful models of allied health rural clinical placements and provides an evidence based framework for improved planning and evaluation.

Indexed as

Clinical ClerkshipRural Health ServicesAllied Health PersonnelAustraliaHumansStudentsWorkforceAllied healthPlacementProgram logicRecruitmentRuralScoping reviewWork integrated learning

Identifiers

PMID32928199
PMCPMC7489211

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.