Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41164050›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

Exploring Medical Student and Staff Perspectives on Clinical Placements: Factors Influencing Attendance and Engagement.

Hannah J Sadler, Aneeta A John, Sophie Thomas, Laura Sevenoaks, Lauren J Medwell, Anila Viepadan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Hannah J SadlerMedical Education, Great Western Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Trust, Swindon, GBR.
Aneeta A JohnMedical Education, Great Western Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Trust, Swindon, GBR.
Sophie ThomasMedical Education, Great Western Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Trust, Swindon, GBR.
Laura SevenoaksMedical Education, Great Western Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Trust, Swindon, GBR.
Lauren J MedwellMedical Education, Great Western Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Trust, Swindon, GBR.
Anila ViepadanMedical Education, Great Western Hospital National Health Service (NHS) Trust, Swindon, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Medical students are expected to spend a significant amount of time on clinical placement as part of their training. However, attendance rates at placements are often low, and engagement is inadequate. This has a negative impact on medical student learning and wastes NHS and university resources. Aims This study aims to gain insight into both medical student and clinical staff experiences of placements to identify reasons behind low attendance and possible improvements. Methods  This study utilised an exploratory mixed-methods design using questionnaires to collect both qualitative and quantitative data including Likert scales and multiple-choice and ranking questions from staff and student respondents at one large NHS trust, UK. Participants included staff working in clinical areas in which students are based as well as medical students on placement at the trust from three different UK universities. Data were analysed using R (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria), and between-group comparisons were performed for four thematically matched items using the Mann-Whitney U test. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Qualitative analysis was undertaken using inductive thematic analysis by multiple researchers to ensure coding consistency. Results  We received 87 responses (46 from students and 41 from staff). Quantitative data revealed that 63.0% of students had been turned away from clinical placement and 30.0% did not feel part of the team when attending. Students rated the availability of valuable learning opportunities lower (median = 4) compared with staff (median = 5), with a significant difference (U = 561.5, p < 0.001, r = -0.40). Conversely, students perceived that there were more medical students than opportunities (median = 3) compared with staff (median = 2), also significantly different (U = 1328.5, p < 0.001, r = 0.41). No significant difference was observed regarding whether the number of students was appropriate (U = 994.0, p = 0.64, r = 0.05). Similarly, perceptions of student preparedness did not differ significantly (U = 1,122.5, p = 0.087, r = 0.19), although staff ratings trended lower. Qualitative analysis identified overlapping themes from students and staff, including organisation and integration into the team, alongside student-specific themes of workplace-based teaching, staff awareness, feeling welcome, and responsibility, and staff-specific themes of communication and cultural attitudes towards education. Conclusion  This study highlighted several key reasons behind poor engagement and attendance of medical students in clinical placements. These include communication barriers, poor organisation, lack of team integration, and overcrowding. These can be overcome with simple, practical solutions such as pre-allocating students to staff, sharing student timetables with clinical staff, careful timetabling to avoid student clashes, and improved availability of teaching in the clinical environment.

Indexed as

attendance ratesexperiences of medical student placementshealthcare staff perspectivesimproving clinical placementsmedical student perspectivesmedical student placements

Identifiers

PMID41164050
PMCPMC12560193

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.