ReviewMedical science educator2024
How Are Alternative Clinical Placements Performed Compared to Traditional Clinical Placements During the COVID-19 Pandemic? Sought Through a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Medical science educator, 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.
- The effect of segmented-interactive video demonstration on student performance in procedural skills among healthcare students.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2026Article
- Healthcare Practice Post COVID-19 Impacts: Will 21st Century Pharmacists Become Global, Agile, Collaborative and Curated?Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clinical placement is the essential method of learning in health professions education, but it has been the most disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Institutions of higher education resorted to alternative learning such as telehealth, simulations, and blended-learning for clinical placement to ensure that educational activities continue without delay. However, this raises questions about student competency and necessitates making up for missed in-person hours. A thorough investigation of the effectiveness of alternative clinical placement learning is required. A systematic searching was conducted on ten electronic databases, and the quality of the included articles was assessed using the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI). A meta-analysis was conducted by pooling studies with examination mark outcomes. Twenty-four articles were included in the systematic review and nine were included in the meta-analysis. The average MERSQI score for included studies is 11.15. Outcomes on student performance favor alternative placement, whereas perceived-based outcomes have mixed results and are slightly prone to traditional clinical placement. Meta-analysis indicates that alternative learning is either more effective than traditional clinical placement or at least on par with it. There is a discrepancy between perceived outcome and performance assessment regarding the utility of alternative learning to conventional clinical placement. Nonetheless, objective measurement outcomes and the meta-analysis support alternative learning as a reliable learning strategy for clinical education. Alternative learning for clinical placement experience can be improved further by adding more synchronous sessions, and implementing various learning methods, learning activities based on strong instructional design, and at least a short real-setting attachment.
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.