Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39198885›Full record

SynthesisBMC medical education2024

Designing near-peer mentoring for work integrated learning outcomes: a systematic review.

Merrolee Penman, Joanna Tai, Gretel Evans, Jennie Brentnall, Belinda Judd

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Merrolee PenmanFaculty of Health Sciences, Curtin School of Allied Health, Curtin University, Bentley, 6102, Australia. merrolee.penman@curtin.edu.au.
Joanna TaiCentre for Research in Assessment and Digital Learning (CRADLE), Deakin University, Melbourne, 3008, Australia.
Gretel EvansSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, 2006, Australia.
Jennie BrentnallSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, 2006, Australia.
Belinda JuddSchool of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, 2006, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWork-integrated learning (WIL) is a core aspect of allied health education. WIL placements typically focus on developing clinical skills, with broader conceptions of work readiness a secondary consideration. Near-peer mentoring (NPM), where senior students mentor junior students, is one WIL placement model that holds promise for developing students' work readiness, along with additional benefits for educators and service users. While there is emerging evidence of the benefits of NPM in allied health, a more comprehensive understanding of the design and outcomes of NPM WIL placements for allied health students, their educators and service users is needed.

methodsA systematic search of seven electronic databases (CINAHL, ERIC, ProQuest Education, Medline, PsychInfo, EMBASE and Scopus) from 2003 to 2022 was conducted with 4195 records reviewed. Included studies reported on near-peer mentoring between at least one of the identified 11 allied health professionals providing services to real people (i.e. not simulation). Data extracted included pedagogical approaches, type of service model and relationship of peers to each other and educator, objectives for implementing the NPM, and effects for students. Quality appraisal was undertaken using the Standards for Reporting of Qualitative Research (SRQR).

resultsFourteen studies met the inclusion criteria. The majority were North American in origin, from the disciplines of pharmacy, physiotherapy, psychology and occupational therapy, and used a range of research designs. Four types of placement design were observed from incidental co-location of students and observing outcomes through to deliberate preparation of students and/or educators for their roles in a NPM placement. Outcomes for junior students included lowered anxiety leading to increased confidence and motivation to learn and thus enhanced clinical skills. Senior student outcomes included development of educator skills, increased confidence, and enhanced professional reasoning. Service users and educators also benefited from NPM; however, evidence was sparse in these areas.

conclusionThe evidence supports near-peer mentoring as a valuable WIL model to support work readiness, and several general pedagogical designs are evident. Future research should design NPM WIL with a greater integration of educational theory and evaluate outcomes beyond satisfaction and self-reported experiences.

Indexed as

MentoringPeer GroupAllied Health PersonnelClinical CompetenceHumansMentorsClinical placementsHealthHealth professions educationMentoringNear-peerPeer-assisted learningStudent supervisionWork-integrated learningWork readiness

Identifiers

PMID39198885
PMCPMC11351336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.