Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42210197›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2026

Development and evaluation of 'Learning-Bytes': a mixed methods study of e-learning modules for clinical educator development in allied health professions.

Sarah McMullen-Roach, Caroline Fryer, Helen A Banwell, Kitty Pham, Emma Hiscock, Gisela van Kessel, Anna Phillips

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Sarah McMullen-RoachSchool of Allied Health and Human Performance, Adelaide University, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.
Caroline FryerSchool of Allied Health and Human Performance, Adelaide University, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.
Helen A BanwellSchool of Allied Health and Human Performance, Adelaide University, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.
Kitty PhamAustralian Centre for Precision Health, School of Public Health, College of Health, Adelaide University, Adelaide, 5001, Australia.
Emma HiscockDepartment of Rural Health, Adelaide University, Nuriootpa, SA, 5355, Australia.
Gisela van KesselSchool of Allied Health and Human Performance, Adelaide University, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia.
Anna PhillipsSchool of Allied Health and Human Performance, Adelaide University, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA, 5001, Australia. Anna.Phillips@adelaide.edu.au.

Funding

University of South Australia Teaching and Learning Grant 2022
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe growing demand for student clinical placements has led to increased reliance on clinician educators, many of whom have limited teaching experience. To support these educators effectively, professional development must be tailored to their educational needs and accessibility requirements.

methodsA convergent mixed‑methods design was used to develop, trial, and evaluate Learning‑Bytes, a suite of five e‑learning modules for clinical educators. The program was co‑designed with an expert reference group and informed by self‑determination theory and the ADDIE instructional design model to ensure relevance, accessibility, and usability. Program evaluation was guided by the Kirkpatrick Model and incorporated quantitative and qualitative data from surveys (Additional File 2) and focus groups to assess usability and impact on clinical educators' knowledge, confidence, perceived competence, and behaviours over 12 months. Reporting aligns with the GRAMMS (Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study) framework. Clinician educators supervising allied health professional students at our university were eligible to participate. Data analysis included descriptive statistics for quantitative data, traditional content analysis, and inductive thematic analysis for qualitative data. Following threads of key findings through iterative team discussions, an integrated report of findings related to each aim was produced.

resultsOf 123 participants who enrolled in Learning-Bytes, 64 completed all five Learning-Bytes modules and 32 responded to both enrolment and endpoint surveys. Usability feedback was provided by 49 participants, and 13 attended focus groups. Post-program surveys were completed by 13 participants at six months and 7 at twelve months. Across all timepoints, improvements were observed in knowledge, confidence, competence, and behaviour. Integration of qualitative and qualitative analysis revealed that the program positively influenced educator attributes and practices, encouraged behavioural change, and showed potential to enhance student learning experiences. DISCUSSION: Learning-Bytes meets a clear need supporting novice clinical educators feel more confident, competent, and capable in their roles. Flexible, relevant professional development is essential to sustaining a high-quality clinical education workforce amid growing placement demands. The program's modular structure and rigorous design ensure adaptability to evolving educational needs. Findings suggest that Learning-Bytes not only supports individual educator growth but also showed potential to enhance the student learning experience.

Indexed as

Allied Health PersonnelComputer-Assisted InstructionClinical CompetenceFemaleFocus GroupsHumansMaleProgram DevelopmentProgram EvaluationAllied health professions educationClinical supervisionEducationE-learning

Identifiers

PMID42210197
PMCPMC13330070

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.