Designing, Implementing, and Evaluating a Practice Tutor Internship Model during an Acute Care Clinical Internship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to implement and evaluate a novel internship model that incorporates a practice tutor in physiotherapy clinical education during an acute care cardiorespiratory internship at a large acute tertiary care teaching hospital in Canada. Method: A prospective evaluation of this model was conducted by means of a mixed-methods approach using surveys and focus groups. The participants were students and clinical instructors (CIs) who were taking part in the internship. Results: Half of the CIs agreed that the practice tutor model gave them more time to manage their caseload and work with the student than did the traditional model, and 63% would recommend the model for future internships. In reviewing the focus group and open-ended data, we identified four themes: benefits, tensions, critical logistics, and unforeseen blind spots. There was a trend for patient attendance to increase with the practice tutor model compared with the previous year’s internship session and with the 5 weeks immediately preceding the internship. Conclusions: On the basis of CIs’ and students’ self-reports, the piloted practice tutor model was perceived to facilitate students’ clinical reasoning and collaborative learning skills. In addition, during the 5-week internship, the number of patients seen each day by the individual CIs and their students was not reduced, with a trend toward increased patient attendance. There was also a trend toward CIs having the same or more time to manage their caseload and work with the students compared with a non–practice tutor internship model. Recommendations to improve this model in future implementations are made.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".