ArticleBMJ open2024
University staff perspectives on determinants of high-quality health professions student placements in regional, rural and remote Australia: protocol for a mixed-method study.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determining constructs of high-quality rural health student placements: a multiple case ECOUTER study.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Article
- A Cost Comparison From a Health Service Perspective of Three Allied Health Models of Care for Remote Australia: Student-Assisted Services, Fly-In Fly-Out Services and Services Provided by a Resident Clinician.The Australian journal of rural health · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn rural areas, work-integrated learning in the form of health student placements has several potential benefits, including contributing to student learning, enhancing rural health service capacity and attracting future rural health workforce. Understanding what constitutes a high-quality rural placement experience is important for enhancing these outcomes. There is no current standardised definition of quality in the context of rural health placements, nor is there understanding of how this can be achieved across different rural contexts. This study is guided by one broad research question: what do university staff believe are the determinants of high-quality health professions student placements in regional, rural and remote Australia? METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study will adopt a convergent mixed-method design with two components. Component A will use explanatory sequential mixed methods. The first phase of component A will use a survey to explore determinants that contribute to the development of high-quality health student placements from the perspective of university staff who are not employed in University Departments of Rural Health and are involved in the delivery of health student education. The second phase will use semistructured interviews with the same stakeholder group (non-University Department of Rural Health university staff) to identify the determinants of high-quality health student placements. Component B will use a case study Employing COnceptUal schema for policy and Translation Engagement in Research mind mapping method to capture determinants that contribute to the development of high-quality health student placements from the perspective of University Department of Rural Health university staff. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The University of Melbourne Human Ethics Committee approved the study (2022-23201-33373-5). Following this, seven other Australian university human research ethics committees provided external approval to conduct the study. The results of the study will be presented in several peer-review publications and summary reports to key stakeholder groups.
Indexed as
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.