ArticleJournal of advanced nursing2026
Expansive Learning in Practice: A Rapid Evaluation of a Student Nurse Placement Model (Empirical Research Mixed Methods).
Article in Journal of advanced nursing, 2026. 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.
- Expansive Learning in Practice: A Rapid Evaluation of a Student Nurse Placement Model (Empirical Research Mixed Methods).Journal of advanced nursing · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study was to document the process of the implementation and the perceived impact and sustainability of the Expansive Learning in Practice Model and its associated costs to inform future rollout.
designA mixed-method rapid evaluation was conducted, comprising both qualitative and economic workstreams to document the implementation of the Expansive Learning in Practice Model and its associated costs. Semi-structured interviews (n = 44) were carried out with student nurses, student assessors, and staff involved in the delivery of the Model. The qualitative workstream utilised a rapid cycle evaluation approach, where data were collected and analysed in parallel, and preliminary findings were shared with stakeholders as the study was ongoing. The quantitative workstream relied on routinely collected data about non-staff-related costs, staff-related costs, and data on students' participation.
resultsThe main themes developed from the qualitative data included the organisation of the Expansive Learning Experiences, the supportive environment, the enhanced learning experience, and capacity building. Participants perceived that the model had a positive impact on student practice (including preparation and confidence) and on student nurse satisfaction. At the end of the programme, it is estimated that the programme will have cost about £523,572.
conclusionThis model can be used as a framework for hospitals aiming to improve the learning experiences for student nurses. Improvements could be made by increasing staff buy-in and the streamlining of spoke opportunities. Future studies should focus on evaluating the long-term impact of the model, particularly the impact on generating student placement capacity. The evaluation also highlights the need for solutions for potential educational staff shortages, which could pose a risk to maintaining sufficient practice placement capacity for student nurses in healthcare settings. IMPACT: Study participants perceived an improvement in student nurses' learning experiences and student nurse placement capacity as a result of the implementation of this model. REPORTING
methodThe relevant EQUATOR guidelines followed for reporting were the GRAMM guidelines (Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study). NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The study centred around student nurse and staff experiences.
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.