Measuring the impact of The Australian National Placement Evaluation Centre to enhance nursing and midwifery student clinical placements: A multimodal evaluation

Spremljeno u:
Bibliografski detalji
Izdano u:Nurse Education in Practice vol. 87 (Aug 2025), p. 104505-104514
Glavni autor: Ryan, Colleen
Daljnji autori: Cant, Robyn, Hyun, Areum, Procter, Debbie, Alexander, Louise, Bloxsome, Dianne, Hughes, Lynda, Bogossian, Fiona, Cooper, Simon
Izdano:
Elsevier Limited
Teme:
Online pristup:Citation/Abstract
Full Text
Full Text - PDF
Oznake: Dodaj oznaku
Bez oznaka, Budi prvi tko označuje ovaj zapis!

MARC

LEADER 00000nab a2200000uu 4500
001 3244814738
003 UK-CbPIL
022 |a 1471-5953 
022 |a 1873-5223 
024 7 |a 10.1016/j.nepr.2025.104505  |2 doi 
035 |a 3244814738 
045 2 |b d20250801  |b d20250831 
084 |a 170342  |2 nlm 
100 1 |a Ryan, Colleen  |u School of Nursing Midwifery and Social Sciences, Central Queensland University, 160 Ann St, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia 
245 1 |a Measuring the impact of The Australian National Placement Evaluation Centre to enhance nursing and midwifery student clinical placements: A multimodal evaluation 
260 |b Elsevier Limited  |c Aug 2025 
513 |a Journal Article 
520 3 |a Aim To evaluate the early impact of the Centre. Background The educational quality of nursing and midwifery student clinical placement learning varies. The National Placement Evaluation Centre has a pivotal role in quality improvement by systematically collecting student and supervisor feedback on placement experiences. Design Multimodal impact evaluation. Methods Data were collected from website analytics and a survey shared via stakeholder registration emails and social media. The Impact Management Planning and Evaluation Ladder model was used to understand impact. Data were analysed using a sequential, hybrid inductive/deductive approach. Descriptive statistics summarised participant characteristics and qualitative data were themed. Results Website analytics revealed Centre visitors were from 92 countries, with most reviewing placement evaluation tools. Registered NPEC members represented 37 Australian education and 590 placement providers and together they accessed their data 6213 times. There was n = 107 survey responses. Thematic analysis revealed four themes describing user experiences, enhancements to placements and recommendations for system improvements: 1) A valued system, 2) Barriers to engagement, 3) Resulting changes and 4) It’s early days! The deductive analysis revealed far reaching national impact. Conclusions The Australian National Placement Evaluation Centre impact is amplified by its nationally consistent reach. Data collection via validated placement evaluation tools and streamlined data reporting informs improvements to the quality of nursing and midwifery clinical placements. Increased promotion of the NPEC to students is needed. The Centre has the potential to enhance clinical placement quality across national and international healthcare professions. Promotion to students is necessary. Future directions are reported. 
610 4 |a World Health Organization 
651 4 |a Australia 
653 |a Quality management 
653 |a Students 
653 |a Websites 
653 |a Midwifery 
653 |a Midwifery education 
653 |a Conferences 
653 |a Validity 
653 |a Midwives 
653 |a Quality improvement 
653 |a Clinical placements 
653 |a Polls & surveys 
653 |a Stakeholders 
653 |a Nursing 
653 |a Learning 
653 |a School environment 
653 |a Supervisors 
653 |a Feedback 
653 |a Multimodality 
653 |a Health care 
653 |a Social media 
653 |a Visitors 
653 |a Clinical nursing 
653 |a Email 
653 |a Responses 
653 |a Professions 
653 |a Mass media effects 
653 |a Data quality 
653 |a Registration 
653 |a Nurses 
653 |a Evaluation 
653 |a Data collection 
653 |a Health services 
653 |a Education 
653 |a Learning outcomes 
653 |a Statistics 
653 |a Literature Reviews 
653 |a Participant Characteristics 
653 |a Authors 
653 |a Supervisory Methods 
653 |a Evidence Based Practice 
653 |a Comparative Education 
653 |a Comparative Analysis 
653 |a Obstetrics 
653 |a Educational Environment 
653 |a Individual Characteristics 
653 |a Educational Quality 
653 |a Sequential Approach 
653 |a Learning Experience 
653 |a Mail Surveys 
653 |a Ethics 
653 |a Feedback (Response) 
653 |a Student Surveys 
653 |a Data Analysis 
653 |a Information Sources 
653 |a Recruitment 
653 |a Educational Facilities Improvement 
700 1 |a Cant, Robyn  |u Health Innovation and Transformation Centre, Federation University, Berwick, 100 Clyde Rd, VIC 3806, Australia 
700 1 |a Hyun, Areum  |u School of Nursing and Midwifery, National Placement Evaluation Centre, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Rd Nathan, 4111, Australia 
700 1 |a Procter, Debbie  |u Faculty of Health and Human Science, Southern Cross University, Northern Rivers, Gold Coast, Coffs Harbour, Australia 
700 1 |a Alexander, Louise  |u School of Nursing & Midwifery, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, 221 Burwood Hwy, Burwood, VIC 3125, Australia 
700 1 |a Bloxsome, Dianne  |u School of Nursing and Midwifery, Edith Cowan University, 270 Joondalup Drive, Joondalup, WA 6027, Australia 
700 1 |a Hughes, Lynda  |u School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Rd Nathan, 4111, Australia 
700 1 |a Bogossian, Fiona  |u School of Health, University of the Sunshine Coast, 1 Moreton Pde, Petrie, 4502, Australia 
700 1 |a Cooper, Simon  |u School of Nursing and Midwifery, Edith Cowan University, 270 Joondalup Drive, Joondalup, WA 6027, Australia 
773 0 |t Nurse Education in Practice  |g vol. 87 (Aug 2025), p. 104505-104514 
786 0 |d ProQuest  |t Sociology Database 
856 4 1 |3 Citation/Abstract  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3244814738/abstract/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3244814738/fulltext/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch 
856 4 0 |3 Full Text - PDF  |u https://www.proquest.com/docview/3244814738/fulltextPDF/embedded/7BTGNMKEMPT1V9Z2?source=fedsrch