645
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
REVIEW

Learning Outcomes from Participation in Student-Run Health Clinics: A Systematic Review

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, &
Pages 143-157 | Received 10 Aug 2022, Accepted 06 Dec 2022, Published online: 19 Jan 2023
 

Abstract

Student-run clinics (SRCs) offer unique opportunities for students to engage in healthcare delivery, but the student learning outcomes of such clinics have not yet been systematically examined in a comprehensive manner. The purpose of this review was to appraise and synthesize existing literature pertaining to student learning outcomes associated with participation in SRCs. A systematic review was undertaken using PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases. The quality of articles that met inclusion criteria articles was appraised using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). Study details, such as learning outcomes, were also extracted. Ninety-two studies met inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted in North America (n = 73, 79.3%), and related to clinics involving solely medical students (n = 35, 38.0%) or multi-professional clinics (n = 34, 37.0%). Demonstrated learning outcomes of SRC participation include clinical skills, interprofessional skills, empathy/compassion for underserved patients, and leadership. SRC participation had little apparent impact on students’ future career directions. Quality appraisal via the MMAT found mixed levels of research quality amongst reviewed studies. In summary, while SRC participation appears to offer benefits for student learning, improved study design and research outside of North American contexts would further advance knowledge.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Librarian Dr. Christina Wissinger from Pennsylvania State University for assisting with the development of the search strategy, and [names blinded] for their assistance screening titles and abstracts.

Disclosure

Professor Patrea Andersen reports grants from Trust Waikato, during the conduct of the study. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.