MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128939640

Learner-Led Nursing Placements in England: Evaluating Impact and Implementation Opportunities

2025· article· en· W7128939640 on OpenAlexaff
Rosie Kneafsey, Laura; id_orcid 0000-0002-1404-6304 Wilde, Liz Lees, Kayden Schumacher, Joanne Guy, Aimée Walker-Clarke, Hesam Ghiasvand, Lynn Clouder

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Portal (King's College London) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicAppreciative Inquiry and Organizational Change
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Population and Public Health
FundersUniversity of Salford ManchesterOrdu ÜniversitesiAlder Hey Children's NHS Foundation Trust
KeywordsCoachingPsychological interventionContext (archaeology)PerceptionQualitative researchAppreciative inquiryQualitative propertyStructured predictionTheory of change
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: ‘Learner-led’ placement models in nursing, such as ‘Collaborative Learning in Practice’ and coaching seek to improve learner experience, competence, and retention as well as increasing placement capacity (Hill et al 2020). Whilst there is appetite within NHS Trusts to adopt learner-led models, there are gaps in understanding how best to do this.Aim: To provide insight into the organisational and socio-cultural conditions needed for successful implementation of learner-led placements.Methods: Mixed methods evaluation, underpinned by Appreciative Enquiry (Whitney & Cooperrider 2011) and Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation Framework(Kirkpatrick 1998), commissioned in 2024 by NHS England. Work-packages included i) scoping review; ii) five organisational case studies; iii) semi-structured interviews with nurses, students and academics. Qualitative data analysed thematically (Braun & Clark 2022). (CU Ethics Ref P183633, 23/01/2025)Results: The scoping review included 32 papers and case studies yielded 52 interviews. Learner-led typologies include; collaborative models; coaching approaches; learner-led dyads, triads, clinics; and interprofessional approaches. Student benefits derived from learner led models can be framed using Self Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan 2000). Nurses were pro-active in implementing early interventions to prepare students for the transition to registration . Contextual factors within the learning milieu, including the culture; nursing team maturity; and acuity and activity levels, impacted learning. The prevailing perception was that learner-led models resulted in better patient care.Discussion: Based on evaluation findings, methods of embedding and optimising learner-led placements are presented. Rather than a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach, case study sites adapted typologies along a continuum to suit the clinical context and varying student needs. Learner-led placements can contribute to improved outcomes for student, patient and nurses.Conclusion: Understanding typical barriers and facilitators to learner-led placements provides a framework for successful implementation. Continued evaluation and adaptation of learner-led models will be crucial in responding to the evolving needs of healthcare education.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.127
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch Portal (King's College London)Same topicAppreciative Inquiry and Organizational ChangeFrench-language works237,207