Student-Run Clinics: Opportunities for Interprofessional Education and Increasing Social Accountability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Collaborative practice is a necessary component of providing effective, socially responsive, patient-centred care; however, effective teamwork requires training. Canadian student-run clinics are interprofessional community service-learning initiatives where students plan and deliver clinical and health promotion services, with the assistance of licensed healthcare professionals.Methods and Findings: In this article, we use a reflective approach to examine the phenomenon of student-run clinics in Canada. First, we briefly review the history of student-run clinics and then describe one particular clinic in detail. Then, drawing on the experiences of student-run clinics across the country, we identify common themes and challenges that we believe characterize these programs.Conclusion: Student-run clinics in Canada emphasize health equity, interprofessionalism, and student leadership. As more student-run clinics are developed, both nationally and internationally, co-ordinated research efforts are needed to determine their effects on students, institutions, communities, and healthcare systems. If educators can learn to collaborate effectively with student leaders, student-run clinics may be ideal sites for advancing learning around interprofessionalism and social accountability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".