ORCID Profile
0000-0003-3801-9308
Current Organisation
James Cook University
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
Date: 31-08-2023
DOI: 10.2196/44020
Abstract: University-affiliated student-led health care services have emerged in response to the challenges faced by universities in securing quality clinical placements for health care students. Evidence of the health care benefits and challenges of student-led health care services is growing, while evidence of clinical placement performance remains variable and not generalizable. Though there have been previous attempts to develop a framework for evaluation of clinical placement performance, concerns have been raised about the applicability of these frameworks across the various placement settings. Additionally, the perspectives of all key stakeholders on the critical areas of clinical placement performance have yet to be considered. This study’s objective is to gather information on areas of measurement related to student learning outcomes, experience of placement, and costs of placement and then develop consensus on which of those areas need to be included in a framework for evaluation of clinical placement performance within the context of student-led health care services. The aim of this paper is to outline a protocol for a modified Delphi study designed to gain consensus on what is important to measure when evaluating an allied health clinical placement. We will recruit up to 30 experts to a heterogeneous expert panel in a modified Delphi study. Experts will consist of those with firsthand experience either coordinating, supervising, or undertaking clinical placement. Purposive s ling will be used to ensure maximum variation in expert panel member characteristics. Experts’ opinions will be sought on measuring student learning outcomes, student experience, and cost of clinical placement, and other areas of clinical placement performance that are considered important. Three rounds will be conducted to establish consensus on what is important to measure when evaluating clinical placement. Each round is anticipated to yield both quantitative data (eg, percentage of agreement) and qualitative data (eg, free-text responses). In each round, quantitative data will be analyzed descriptively and used to determine consensus, which will be defined as ≥70% agreement. Qualitative responses will be analyzed thematically and used to inform the subsequent round. Findings of each round will be presented, both consensus data and qualitative responses in each subsequent round, to inform expert panel members and to elicit further rankings on areas of measurement yet to achieve consensus. Data analysis is currently underway, with a planned publication in 2024. The modified Delphi approach, supported by existing research and its ability to gain consensus through multiround expert engagement, provides an appropriate methodology to inform the development of a framework for the evaluation of clinical placement performance in allied health service. DERR1-10.2196/44020
Publisher: JMIR Publications Inc.
Date: 03-11-2022
Abstract: niversity-affiliated student-led health care services have emerged in response to the challenges faced by universities in securing quality clinical placements for health care students. Evidence of the health care benefits and challenges of student-led health care services is growing, while evidence of clinical placement performance remains variable and not generalizable. Though there have been previous attempts to develop a framework for evaluation of clinical placement performance, concerns have been raised about the applicability of these frameworks across the various placement settings. Additionally, the perspectives of all key stakeholders on the critical areas of clinical placement performance have yet to be considered. his study’s objective is to gather information on areas of measurement related to student learning outcomes, experience of placement, and costs of placement and then develop consensus on which of those areas need to be included in a framework for evaluation of clinical placement performance within the context of student-led health care services. The aim of this paper is to outline a protocol for a modified Delphi study designed to gain consensus on what is important to measure when evaluating an allied health clinical placement. e will recruit up to 30 experts to a heterogeneous expert panel in a modified Delphi study. Experts will consist of those with firsthand experience either coordinating, supervising, or undertaking clinical placement. Purposive s ling will be used to ensure maximum variation in expert panel member characteristics. Experts’ opinions will be sought on measuring student learning outcomes, student experience, and cost of clinical placement, and other areas of clinical placement performance that are considered important. Three rounds will be conducted to establish consensus on what is important to measure when evaluating clinical placement. Each round is anticipated to yield both quantitative data (eg, percentage of agreement) and qualitative data (eg, free-text responses). In each round, quantitative data will be analyzed descriptively and used to determine consensus, which will be defined as ≥70% agreement. Qualitative responses will be analyzed thematically and used to inform the subsequent round. Findings of each round will be presented, both consensus data and qualitative responses in each subsequent round, to inform expert panel members and to elicit further rankings on areas of measurement yet to achieve consensus. ata analysis is currently underway, with a planned publication in 2024. he modified Delphi approach, supported by existing research and its ability to gain consensus through multiround expert engagement, provides an appropriate methodology to inform the development of a framework for the evaluation of clinical placement performance in allied health service. ERR1-10.2196/44020
Publisher: University of Otago Library
Date: 31-03-2022
Abstract: Introduction: In student-led healthcare services, health students take responsibility for the management and delivery of health services as part of clinical training. Like all healthcare services, student-led healthcare services need to be evaluated to ensure they provide high quality, safe and cost-effective services. The aim of this literature review was to understand how student-led healthcare services have been evaluated to date and to assess alignment of previous evaluations with the Triple Aim framework. The Triple Aim is a conceptual framework offering a systematic approach to evaluating healthcare services that may be appropriate for evaluation of student-led services. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for articles describing a student-led healthcare service and were screened for studies that evaluated the impact of a student-led healthcare service on patient outcomes. Critical appraisal was informed by Stiefel and Nolan’s (2012) IHI white paper A Guide to Measuring the “Triple Aim”, and each article was appraised against the Triple Aim measurement principles and dimensions of care.Results: Fourteen of 211 identified articles met the inclusion criteria. All 14 studies met the Triple Aim measurement principles of “a defined population”, “gather data over time” and “distinguish between measures”, while only eight of the 14 studies achieved “comparison data”. All 14 studies measured at least one or more of the Triple Aim dimensions. Conclusions: There was little consistency across the evaluations of student-led healthcare services, limiting the extent to which the benefits of student-led healthcare services can be shown to be a valuable resource to the healthcare system. Further investigation is required to determine a suitable evaluation framework for student-led healthcare services.
Publisher: Bond University
Date: 28-06-2022
DOI: 10.53300/001C.36735
Abstract: Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the face-to-face delivery of exercise with social distancing restrictions preventing close contact between clients and exercise professionals. Additionally, exercise physiology students have had to adapt to these changes and use telehealth to achieve their learning outcomes. This study aimed to explore client and student perspectives of their experience with face-to-face exercise delivery prior to COVID-19 restrictions and telehealth during restrictions. Methods: Clients and students were invited to complete an online survey exploring their experience with student-led exercise services prior to COVID-19 restrictions and during restrictions. Likert-scale questions were compared using a Wilcoxon test and open-ended responses were thematically analysed. Results: Prior to COVID-19 restrictions, all students (n = 7) reported that providing face-to-face exercise physiology services resulted in positive learning experiences and clients (n = 12) were satisfied with their experience. During the restrictions, the client satisfaction with exercise delivery via telehealth remained high, however, students’ learning experience was hindered by the restrictions. Discussion and conclusion: For clients, satisfaction with the exercise delivery remained high and the convenience of telehealth were useful during a pandemic. For students, their exercise prescription and ability to assess and monitor their clients were impacted by using telehealth.
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 07-09-2015
Abstract: Men are less willing to seek health professional advice than women and die more often than women from preventable causes. Therefore, it is important to increase male engagement with health initiatives. This study reports the outcomes of a student-assisted, interprofessional, 12-week health program for overweight adult males. The program included weekly health education and structured, supervised group exercise sessions. Thirteen males (participants) and 18 university students (session facilitators) completed the program. Participants were assessed for a range of health and physical activity measures and health and health profession knowledge. Participants demonstrated significant improvement in activity, knowledge, and perceptions of physical and mental function, and appreciated the guided, group sessions. Students completed an interprofessional readiness questionnaire and reported significant improvement in the understanding of the benefits of interprofessional education and of their role in health care. This program provides evidence of the dual benefit that occurs from the delivery of a student-assisted, interprofessional men’s health program to at-risk community members.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2015
Location: Australia
No related grants have been discovered for Lisa Simmons.