Learning health systems · 2026
Evaluating HEART: Student Engagement and Health System Impact in a Person-Centered Learning Health System Initiative.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Carr Tracey, Foster Stefanie, Stobart Phoebe, Squair Carson, Spock Taylor, Skrapek Candace, King Margaret, Andreas Brenda, Rohatinsky Noelle, Stobart Christine, Ward Caitlin, Zheng Tina, Farthing Gerald
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Healthcare Education and Research Training (HEART) is a cocurricular, engaged learning initiative that supported undergraduate students in acquiring and applying healthcare research skills. The project was guided by a learning health system (LHS)-aligned model focused on the collection, synthesis, and rapid translation of patient-reported experience data into actionable recommendations. In the 2023/2024 academic year, a cohort of 28 students completed the pilot project to report LHS-based recommendations to healthcare directors. This paper reports the qualitative evaluation conducted in August 2024 following the pilot to assess the initiative's implementation, participant experience, and healthcare system impacts.
METHODS: Virtual, semi-structured interviews were conducted with students who participated in HEART and health system directors from a provincial health authority. Interview guides were developed by the research team in collaboration with Patient Partners. Inductive content analysis (ICA) was used to categorize information significant to the research questions. Final themes were established using a team-based approach.
RESULTS: Student interviews indicated that participants found HEART to be a meaningful learning experience that strengthened their understanding of the healthcare system and patient experiences and helped them build applied research skills. Health system directors also expressed strong satisfaction with the project, noting that student-collected qualitative data identified service gaps, supported patient and community engagement, and contributed to measurable care improvements in at least one clinic. Suggested areas for project improvement included adjusting length of training sessions, increasing clarity around expectations and timelines, streamlining final reporting, and refining the patient interview process to gather more detailed information about specific patient experiences.
CONCLUSION: While various opportunities for improvement were identified, overall, HEART was determined to be a valuable opportunity for developing student healthcare research skills and was of direct benefit to health system partners as an LHS-aligned initiative providing actionable data used to identify healthcare gaps and improve patient care. Feedback and recommendations drawn from the evaluation were used to adapt and improve HEART for the following academic year.
METHODS: Virtual, semi-structured interviews were conducted with students who participated in HEART and health system directors from a provincial health authority. Interview guides were developed by the research team in collaboration with Patient Partners. Inductive content analysis (ICA) was used to categorize information significant to the research questions. Final themes were established using a team-based approach.
RESULTS: Student interviews indicated that participants found HEART to be a meaningful learning experience that strengthened their understanding of the healthcare system and patient experiences and helped them build applied research skills. Health system directors also expressed strong satisfaction with the project, noting that student-collected qualitative data identified service gaps, supported patient and community engagement, and contributed to measurable care improvements in at least one clinic. Suggested areas for project improvement included adjusting length of training sessions, increasing clarity around expectations and timelines, streamlining final reporting, and refining the patient interview process to gather more detailed information about specific patient experiences.
CONCLUSION: While various opportunities for improvement were identified, overall, HEART was determined to be a valuable opportunity for developing student healthcare research skills and was of direct benefit to health system partners as an LHS-aligned initiative providing actionable data used to identify healthcare gaps and improve patient care. Feedback and recommendations drawn from the evaluation were used to adapt and improve HEART for the following academic year.