Confidence working with First Nations Australians: Pre/post-rural placement survey of allied health students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Together with addressing social determinants of health, culturally safe healthcare provision is essential for closing the health outcomes gap experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (Indigenous) Australians. Rural placements potentially provide students of the health professions with opportunities to enhance their knowledge and skills regarding cultural safety. However, the impact of placements on and determinants of student confidence around Indigenous people has not been investigated quantitatively. We used rural placements data systematically collected from students, including commencement- and end-of-placement questionnaire responses, to investigate these. <br/><br/>Methods: The study comprised data from all allied health students supervised by the WA Centre for Rural Health during the period 2019–2022 who completed questionnaires at both the commencement and end of their placement. Five-point ordered responses to the question 'How confident do you feel about working with Aboriginal people?' were used to assess student and placement-related determinants of confidence (Confident/Very confident versus other) at baseline and increased confidence (≥1 point) during the placement using crude and adjusted multivariable robust Poisson regression.<br/><br/>Results: Participating students (N=453) were from diverse allied health disciplines (including pharmacy n=92; 20.3%; chiropractic and social work each n=59, 13.0%; occupational therapy and physiotherapy each n=56, 12.4%). Confidence in dealing with Aboriginal people was higher at commencement among males compared with females (adjusted relative risk [aRR] 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22–1.86), students of Australian rural origin compared with others (aRR 1.46; CI 1.18–1.80), and those who reported previous experience working with Indigenous people (aRR 1.40; CI 1.13–1.72). Notably, for all three of these categories, complementary subgroup 'catch-up' during the placement was evident. Placement attributes associated with increased confidence working with Indigenous people between placement commencement and end were interaction with Indigenous people within the placement (aRR 2.15; CI 1.17–3.98), placement model reflecting more structured academic supervision (aRR 1.22; CI 1.04–1.43), and placement length (aRR per additional day 1.002; CI 1.001–1.004).<br/><br/>Conclusions: Survey data from a large sample of health students before and after a rural placement enables detailed investigation of personal and placement-related determinants of educational outcomes of potential importance for future practice. While influenced by students’ demographic attributes and prior experiences, confidence of allied health students in working with Indigenous people is enhanced during rural placements, particularly through direct contact with Indigenous people. Opportunities for direct, meaningful, ideally immersive involvement of students with Indigenous communities are recommended as part of rural placements.
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".