ArticlePRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)2020
Student and Preceptor Experiences in a Mini Longitudinal Integrated Clerkship: A Participatory Self-Study.
Article in PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes of Student Evaluations of Rural and Nonrural Medical Student Preceptors.PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStudents participating in longitudinal integrated clerkships (LIC) experience longitudinal, comprehensive care of patients, report improved satisfaction with their training, and express increased interest in pursuing a career in primary care. To gain these benefits without requiring major curricular change, Ohio University Heritage College of Osteopathic Medicine created a year-long mini LIC (mLIC). As participants in the mLIC, we sought to measure our own experiences, gathering data in a systematic way to share our perceptions.
methodsWe developed an online survey that included scale and open-ended questions. Eight students and three cooperating preceptors completed the survey. We analyzed short answer responses thematically; we analyzed multiple choice responses using descriptive statistics.
resultsParticipants reported increased interest in underserved rural primary care. Students described the continuity with patients as the most beneficial aspect. Students felt the increased autonomy, self-learning, and hands-on nature of the mLIC increased clinical confidence and preparedness for intern year. Students stated the mLIC provided learning opportunities they would not have experienced in traditional block-based clerkships, including longitudinal relationships and prolonged exposure to primary care. Preceptors stated they were able to learn new ideas from the students and were surprised by how much they benefited from the experience.
conclusionStudents did experience many of the benefits of a traditional LIC in our mLIC format focused on a longitudinal experience in family medicine. Students and preceptors were positively impacted and felt the mLIC led to increased student learning, professional development, and increased preceptor satisfaction. Our conclusions are limited by the small sample size included in our study.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.