Exploration of mentor and mentee perspectives of a mentored clinical practice programme to improve patient outcomes in musculoskeletal physiotherapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A recent randomised controlled trial has demonstrated the impact on practice of an educational programme for clinicians. Mentored clinical practice in musculoskeletal physiotherapy resulted in clinically significant improvements in both physiotherapist performance and patient outcomes. The objectives of this study were to explore mentor and mentee perceptions of a mentored clinical practice programme, in order to identify key factors in the process to improve patient outcomes. METHODS: Employing a case study design of a mentoring programme that led to improved patient outcomes, mentored clinical practice was explored from multiple perspectives using a grounded theory strategy of enquiry to derive a theory of mentored clinical practice grounded in the views of the participants. Semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of mentors and mentees were employed along with qualitative observations of mentored clinical practice. Data analysis and collection were concurrent, with analysis an iterative process deriving inductive analytical categories from the data through constant comparison. FINDINGS: Highly informative themes of how the complex interaction between mentor, mentee, patient and environment worked successfully were identified from the data. The mentors' knowledge, additional perspectives, critical analysis and facilitatory style were enabling factors, as were mentees' motivation, openness to criticism and commitment to reflect on practice. Themes around potential threats to the mentees' development were also identified. Overloading or contradictory feedback and lack of relationship with mentees were barriers that mentors could bring; fear, defensiveness, routine working, people-pleasing and lack of experience were potential mentee barriers. A model emerges from the data demonstrating how these themes interact, providing guidance to mentors and mentees to optimise the effectiveness of mentored clinical practice. CONCLUSION: This study provides a sound basis for future mentored clinical practice, producing a model from key themes from a case study where impact on clinician performance and patient outcomes are established.
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".