Abstract
Introduction
Student-led clinics (SLCs) are emerging as a significant model in medical education, offering practical experience in addressing healthcare challenges, especially in resource-limited settings. By bridging theoretical learning with practical experience, SLCs foster medical proficiency and deepen students’ understanding of healthcare disparities, social determinants of health, and patient-centred care. This study evaluates the impact of SLCs on the educational and professional development of medical students in Karachi, Pakistan.
Methods
A cross-sectional pilot study was conducted from May 2023 to May 2024 involving 141 participants, including medical students and doctors, who volunteered at SLCs organized by the Humanity Initiative NGO. Data were collected via a self-administered questionnaire with a five-point Likert scale, focusing on three main themes: Community Service and Impact, Medical Knowledge and Skills Enhancement, and Patient-Centered Care and Communication. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA version 20.
Results
Most participants reported positive impacts of SLCs. High percentages agreed that SLCs provided vital community service (92.91%), enhanced medical knowledge (73.76%), and improved patient-centred care and communication skills (93.62%). Notably, medical students reported more significant benefits compared to medical graduates. Age and speciality influenced the perceived benefits, with younger participants and those interested in Pediatrics reporting higher gains. Significant correlations were found between community service, medical knowledge, and patient-centered care.
Conclusion
SLCs play a crucial role in bridging theoretical learning and practical application for medical students. They enhance medical knowledge, patient care skills, and understanding of healthcare delivery while fostering professional growth. These findings underscore the value of integrating SLCs into medical education to address healthcare disparities and prepare future healthcare professionals.
Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12909-026-08755-1.
Keywords: Student-led clinics; Students, medical; Education, medical, undergraduate; Healthcare disparities; Community health services; Health services accessibility; Social responsibility; Medical education
Introduction
Healthcare delivery is increasingly shaped by continuously evolving epidemiological patterns, technological advances, and growing recognition of the social determinants of health [1]. Consequently such changes have expanded the role of healthcare professionals beyond traditional clinical settings to include community engagement and advocacy, particularly in addressing healthcare inaccessibility [2, 3]. Student-Led Clinics (SLCs) have emerged as an innovative, proactive and strategic response to these real-world healthcare challenges by providing free or low-cost healthcare services while offering experiential learning opportunities for medical students [4].
SLCs embody a paradigm shift where there is integration of classroom-based learning with real-world clinical exposure, allowing students to engage directly with underserved populations. This integration allows students to identify both the problems and possibilities within the healthcare system early in their careers. Through this model, students develop clinical skills, communication abilities, and an understanding of patient-centred care, while also gaining insight into healthcare disparities and barriers to access [5, 6]. By participating in SLCs, medical students not only contribute to early identification and preventive care in underserved populations but also gain hands-on experience that is critical for their professional development [7]. Existing literature albeit primarily from high-income countries, has demonstrated that participation in SLCs enhances medical knowledge, empathy, confidence, and professional identity formation among students, while also benefiting communities through essential healthcare provision [8, 9]. These SLCs ideally should include interdisciplinary teams including nursing students, physiotherapy students, students from allied health, etc. which results in a holistic provision of care as well as improves interdisciplinary cooperation between the students [10]. In this regard, the SLCs have emerged as an important component of medical education and community health promotion.
Beyond clinical skill development, SLCs expose students to diverse cultural, social, and economic contexts, fostering cultural competence and ethical awareness in their clinical and professional conduct [11]. These experiences encourage teamwork, critical thinking, and social accountability, which are increasingly recognized as core competencies in medical education. Thus, SLCs serve as a bridge between academic learning and practical application, benefiting both the students involved and the communities they aim to serve [12]. However, most published evidence on SLCs originates from resource-rich settings serving marginalized populations, rather than from healthcare systems that are themselves resource-limited [13]. In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) such as Pakistan, healthcare systems face systemic constraints, including workforce shortages, limited infrastructure, and financial barriers to care. The role and impact of SLCs in such settings remain underexplored. Understanding how SLCs function within these constraints is essential to evaluating their educational value and broader relevance to medical training in LMICs.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of Student-Led Clinics on the educational and professional development of medical students in Karachi, Pakistan. Specifically, this study examines how participation in SLCs influences students’ medical knowledge, clinical skills, communication abilities, and understanding of healthcare delivery in a resource-limited context. By addressing a gap in the literature from LMIC settings, this study contributes evidence to inform the integration of community-based experiential learning into medical education globally.
Methodology
Setting
This was a cross-sectional pilot study carried out in Karachi, Pakistan from May 2023 to May 2024. Between these dates, a total of 20 Student-Led Clinics (SLCs) were conducted in 3 locations. Each clinic operated for approximately 5 hours per day on a weekend. On average, each clinic had 16–18 medical student volunteers providing care to an average of 150–200 patients per session.
SLCs comprised medical students and doctors who attended a student-led clinic conducted by Humanity Initiative NGO. Humanity Initiative (HI) is a student-led and not-for-profit organization based out of Karachi, Pakistan. The organization is registered by the Sindh government and aims to promote healthcare and awareness accessibility to underserved communities with the help of medical students and health professionals, volunteering their time and knowledge. HI Student-Led Clinics are recurring, structured clinical service models organized and completely run by medical students under the supervision of licensed professionals in underserved areas of Karachi. These clinics operate at regular intervals (e.g., weekly or monthly), maintain patient documentation, and allow for follow-up care. This is distinct from one-time or episodic medical camps or health outreach events, which typically offer time-limited services without continuity. For the purpose of this evaluation, all included activities fit the definition of SLCs as described above.
Each student-led clinic followed a structured model of interprofessional collaboration. Senior medical students (typically in their clinical years) were responsible for initial patient intake, history taking, and conducting basic clinical examinations. Junior students were paired with senior peers for shadowing and support roles. Final-year medical students and recently graduated physicians supervised and guided clinical decision-making and documentation. All diagnostic and treatment decisions, prescriptions, and referrals were reviewed and approved by attending physicians possessing the license from PMDC. This tiered supervision framework ensured a balance between experiential learning for students and patient safety.
The SLCs primarily provided basic primary healthcare services to underserved populations. The clinics operated in community centers, schools, or religious establishments. The services offered included clinical assessment and triage, basic screening (for vital signs, BMI, blood sugar levels, etc.), referral services for cases requiring specialist consultation or advanced diagnostical exams, health education and counseling, etc. The clinics cater to a wide demographic including children, adults, elderly individuals, and mothers with infants. Female physicians were present to provide gender-sensitive care and engage specifically with women for reproductive health concerns. All clinical decisions and treatments were made under the supervision of licensed medical doctors, and appropriate records were maintained for continuity and referral tracking.
Sample size and data collection
Sample size calculation
The sample size was calculated using OpenEpi with a 95% confidence interval and a frequency of 70% [14].
Questionnaire development and validation
The self-administered questionnaire used in this study was developed by the primary investigators in collaboration with faculty advisors experienced in community-based medical education. The complete questionnaire is provided as Supplementary File 1. The tool was developed following a review of relevant literature evaluating student-led and interprofessional clinical education experiences and was adapted to reflect the specific context of Student-Led Clinics (SLCs) implemented in Pakistan [15, 16].
Initial items were designed to assess three core domains: community service and impact, medical knowledge and skills enhancement, and patient-centered care and communication. The questionnaire included five-point Likert-scale items assessing perceived learning outcomes, along with multiple-choice and short-answer questions capturing participant roles, frequency of participation, and feedback on clinic logistics.
Content validity was established through review by a panel of subject-matter experts comprising senior clinicians and medical educators with experience in community health and medical education. Feedback focused on item relevance, clarity, and comprehensiveness, resulting in refinement of wording and removal of redundant items.
Although the questionnaire was not derived from a previously validated instrument, it was pilot tested among ten students who had participated in SLC activities and independently reviewed by two faculty members for clarity, relevance, and content adequacy. Minor revisions were made to improve phrasing and flow based on this feedback. The final questionnaire demonstrated excellent internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.963. Given the absence of validated tools specifically designed to evaluate SLCs in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings, the development of a context-specific instrument was considered appropriate to ensure cultural and educational relevance.
Data collection
After the approval from Ethical Review Board, the self-administered questionnaire was disseminated to the volunteers after each SLC using Google Forms. It was a self-designed questionnaire (supplement 1), which let you proceed after agreeing to informed consent, the questionnaire contained the name, age, gender, designation, speciality of interest, and name of camp attended. In addition, it also included questions to assess the impact using a five-point Likert scale where 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. Scores ranging from 1 to 2 were considered as negative, 3 was considered as neutral, and 4–5 as positive. These were: SLC provides a vital community service, SLC allowed me to explore and better understand social determinants of health, SLC allowed me to explore and better understand barriers to healthcare access, SLC provided me insight into how a medical camp should be arranged, SLC allowed me to put my medical knowledge into action, SLC increased my knowledge in dealing with patients, SLC increased my knowledge in counselling patients, SLC serves as an opportunity to practice patient-centred medical evaluation and examination, SLC was a good opportunity to learn about empathy with patients, SLC taught me how to effectively communicate with fellow clinical staff, SLC allowed adequate patient interactions and SLC allowed me to identify danger signs in patients. Questions with similar themes were combined each yielding a certain score within the category. The results were summed up under 3 themes: Community Service and Impact (Q7–10) Medical Knowledge and Skills Enhancement (Q11–14) and Patient-Centred Care and Communication (Q15–19). Within each of the three categories, cumulative scores of greater than 75% of the total score were interpreted as positive.
Data analysis
The data collected was exported to STATA version 20 and statistical analyses were also performed using STATA. Qualitative variables were reported as frequencies and percentages and compared using the chi-square test. Each of the questions using a Likert scale was reported using a bar graph. Qualitative and quantitative variables are analysed using an independent t-test. A p-value of < 0.05 was significant. Quantitative variables were compared with each other using Pearson’s correlation.
Age was categorized into discrete groups (≤ 20, 21–25, 26–30, and > 30 years) to reflect meaningful educational and professional stages within medical training and early clinical practice. These categories broadly correspond to preclinical students, clinical-phase medical students, recent graduates/interns, and older graduates or faculty participants, respectively. This stratification allowed comparison of perceived educational impact across stages of training while maintaining adequate group sizes for statistical analysis.
Patient and public involvement
Patients and the public were not directly involved in the development of the research question, outcome measures, or the design of this study. The research primarily focused on evaluating the educational impact of Student-Led Clinics (SLCs) on medical students, rather than directly involving patients in the research process. However, the patient care provided during the SLCs informed the clinical learning experiences that were analyzed in this study. Patients were also not involved in the recruitment or conduct of the study. The results will primarily be disseminated through academic platforms and publications targeting medical educators and healthcare professionals. While the burden of intervention in this context (the students’ participation in SLCs) was not assessed by patients, feedback from students regarding their clinical experience with patients was a key component of the study.
Results
Table 1 demonstrates the demographics of the 141 participants that enrolled in the study. The majority of participants were females (68.09%). Medical students constituted 106 (75.18%) of the 141 participants, while 35 (24.82%) participants were medical. Of the medical students, 38.3% were from the 4th year of medical school. The majority of, 75 (53.19%), candidates had primary care their speciality of choice whereas, 41 (29.08%) considered surgery or sister fields as their choice of speciality to pursue, and 17 (12.06%) were interested in paediatrics.
Table 1.
Demographics
| Characteristic | Number n (%) |
|---|---|
| Total Participants | 141 |
| Males | 45 (31.91%) |
| Females | 96 (68.09%) |
| Medical Students | 106 (75.18%) |
| · MS1 | · 7 (4.96%) |
| · MS2 | · 21 (14.89%) |
| · MS3 | · 22 (15.60%) |
| · MS4 | · 45 (31.91%) |
| · MS5 | · 11 (7.80%) |
| Graduates* | 35 (24.82%) |
| Specialty of Choice | |
| · Primary Care** | 75 (53.19%) |
| · Surgery | 41 (29.08%) |
| · Paediatrics | 17 (12.06%) |
| · Others*** | 8 (5.67%) |
*Interns, house officers, residents, consultants
**Internal Medicine, Family Medicine, or Internal Medicine Subspecialty
***ObGyn, Anaesthesia, Dermatology, Psychiatry
Concerning Community Service and Impact, 131 (92.91%) participants agreed that SLCs provided vital community service, while 7 (4.96%) were neutral that SLCs provided critical community service. In terms of SLCs allowing them to explore and better understand the social determinants of health, 129 (91.49%) positively agreed, while 9 (6.38%) were indifferent. One hundred and twenty-seven (90.07%) participants agreed, while 11 (7.80%) were neutral that SLCs allowed them to explore and better understand the barriers to healthcare access. SLCs provided insight into how a medical camp is arranged agreed by 126 (89.36%) participants, however, 12 (8.51%) were indifferent about this statement (Fig. 1).
Fig. 1.
Community service and impact
Regarding SLCs and Medical Knowledge and Skills Enhancement, 104 (73.76%) were acknowledged 31 (21.99%) that SLCs increased their medical knowledge. 132 (92.91%) positively agreed that SLCs allowed them to put their medical knowledge into action, while 6 (4.26%) were indifferent. 129 (91.49%) participants agreed, while 9 (6.38%) were neutral that SLCs also increased their knowledge in dealing with patients. SLCs increased their knowledge in counselling the patients and were agreed by 117 (82.98%) participants, however 5 (3.55%) disagreed with it (Fig. 2).
Fig. 2.
Medical knowledge and skills enhancement
Relating to Patient-centred care and communication, the majority of participants (93.62%) agreed that SLC served as an opportunity to practice patient-centred medical evaluation and examination. One hundred and thirty-one (92.91%) positively agreed that SLC was a good opportunity to learn about empathy with patients. One hundred and twenty-two (86.52%) participants agreed, while 16 (%) were neutral that SLCs taught them how to effectively communicate with fellow clinical staff. SLCs allowed adequate patient interactions was agreed by 130 (92.20%) participants, however, 7 (4.96%) were indifferent about this statement. Lastly, 109 (77.30%) participants agreed that SLCs helped them in identifying danger signs in patients, however, 24 (17.02%) participants were indifferent. Out of 141 participants, 3 (2.13%) participants did not agree either that SLCs served as an opportunity to practice patient-centred medical evaluation and examination or were a good opportunity to learn about empathy with patients or taught them how to effectively communicate with fellow clinical staff (Fig. 3).
Fig. 3.
Patient-centred care and communication
A statistically significant association was noted between the age of respondents and community service and impact benefits seen from SLCs (p = 0.000). All age groups of < 20, 21–25, and 26–30 reported high percentages (84.2%, 91.0%, 89.5% respectively) of benefit seen (Table 2).
Table 2.
Factors impacting community service and impact
| Variables | SLCs have a positive impact on Community Service and Impact | X2 | P- value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed (%) | Disagreed (%) | |||
| Gender | 0.6255 | 0.429 | ||
| Male | 41 (91.1) | 4 (8.89) | ||
| Female | 83 (86.5) | 13 (13.5) | ||
| Designation | 2.7704 | 0.096 | ||
| Medical Student | 96 (90.6) | 10 (9.4) | ||
| Graduates | 28 (80.0) | 7 (20.0) | ||
| Age | 23.0552 | 0.000 | ||
| < 20 | 16 (84.2) | 3 (15.8) | ||
| 21–25 | 91 (91.0) | 9 (9.00) | ||
| 26–30 | 17 (89.5) | 2 (10.5) | ||
| > 30 | 0 (0.00) | 3 (100) | ||
| Speciality of Choice | 2.1952 | 0.533 | ||
| Primary Care | 65 (86.7) | 10 (0.13) | ||
| Surgery | 37 (90.2) | 4 (9.80) | ||
| Paediatrics | 16 (94.1) | 1 (5.90) | ||
| Others | 6 (75.0) | 2 (25.0) | ||
There was a significant difference (p = 0.003) noted between benefits reported by medical students (82.1%) as compared to graduates (57.1%). The age of responders had a statistically significant association with benefits seen in medical knowledge and skills from SLCs (p = 0.003). Those between 21–25 years (82.0%) reported the most benefit, followed by those < 20 years (68.4%), followed by those between 26–30 years (63.2%), and lastly those > 30 years did not report getting any benefits (Table 3).
Table 3.
Factors impacting medical knowledge and skills
| Variables | SLCs have a positive impact on Medical knowledge and skills | X2 | P- value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed (%) | Disagreed (%) | |||
| Gender | 0.6112 | 0.434 | ||
| Male | 36 (80.0) | 9 (20.0) | ||
| Female | 71 (74.0) | 25 (26.0) | ||
| Designation | 8.9385 | 0.003 | ||
| Medical Student | 87 (82.1) | 19 (17.9) | ||
| Graduates | 20 (57.1) | 15 (42.9) | ||
| Age | 13.7446 | 0.003 | ||
| < 20 | 13 (68.4) | 6 (31.6) | ||
| 21–25 | 82 (82.0) | 18 (18.0) | ||
| 26–30 | 12 (63.2) | 7 (36.8) | ||
| > 30 | 0 (0.00) | 3 (100) | ||
| Speciality of Choice | 2.1440 | 0.543 | ||
| Primary Care | 54 (72.0) | 21 (28.0) | ||
| Surgery | 32 (78.0) | 9 (22.0) | ||
| Paediatrics | 15 (88.2) | 2 (11.8) | ||
| Others | 6 (75.0) | 2 (25.0) | ||
Medical students (77.4%) reported receiving more benefits as compared to graduates (60.0%), and this was a statistically significant difference (p = 0.045). Age was also significantly associated (p = 0.001) with benefits received from SLCs with those between 21–25 years of age (81.0%) reporting the most benefit, followed by those between 26–30 years (63.2%) and those < 20 years (52.6%), while those > 30 years (0.0%) did not receive any benefits (Table 4).
Table 4.
Factors impacting patient-centred care and communication
| Variables | SLCs have a positive impact on Patient-Centred Care and Communication | X2 | P- value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed (%) | Disagreed (%) | |||
| Gender | 0.0027 | 0.959 | ||
| Male | 33 (73.3) | 12 (26.7) | ||
| Female | 70 (72.9) | 26 (27.1) | ||
| Designation | 4.0271 | 0.045 | ||
| Medical Student | 82 (77.4) | 24 (22.6) | ||
| Graduates | 21 (60.0) | 14 (40.0) | ||
| Age | 16.3100 | 0.001 | ||
| < 20 | 10 (52.6) | 9 (47.4) | ||
| 21–25 | 81 (81.0) | 19 (19.0) | ||
| 26–30 | 12 (63.2) | 7 (36.8) | ||
| > 30 | 0 (0.00) | 3 (100) | ||
| Speciality of Choice | 3.6431 | 0.303 | ||
| Primary Care | 53 (70.7) | 22 (29.3) | ||
| Surgery | 32 (78.0) | 9 (22.0) | ||
| Paediatrics | 14 (82.4) | 3 (17.6) | ||
| Others | 4 (50.0) | 4 (50.0) | ||
Pearson’s product correlation indicated highly positive relationships between the following pairs: medical knowledge and skills enhancement, patient-centred care and communication, and community service and impact. Therefore, an increase in one of these factors would lead to an increase in the other (Table 5).
Table 5.
Pearson’s correlation
| Community Service and Impact | Medical Knowledge and Skills Enhancement | Patient-Centred Care and Communication | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Community Service and Impact | 1 | ||
| Medical Knowledge and Skills enhancement | 0.841** | 1 | |
| Patient-Centred Care and Communication | 0.882** | 0.900** | 1 |
**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)
Discussion
SLCs have a strong history with the first SLC being reported to be conducted as far back as 1967 [17]. The SLCs have since then proliferated globally and intensified in the past decade. Over time, these clinics have expanded, especially across North America, where more than 150 student-run clinics now operate under structured faculty supervision [18, 19]. These clinics are proving to be helpful to both patients and students [5]. In contrast, such initiatives have only recently been introduced in Pakistan, providing an opportunity to assess their relevance and impact in low-resource settings.
Our findings suggest that SLCs offer significant educational value for medical students while simultaneously addressing unmet community healthcare needs. An overwhelming majority, 91.45% and 90.7% agreed that SLCs assisted them in understanding the social determinants and barriers to healthcare access respectively. These insights align with global studies demonstrating how exposure to marginalized communities enhances medical students’ empathy and understanding of healthcare inequities [6, 8]. Providing volunteers with autonomy in managing and leading in a healthcare setting, 89% of the volunteers agreed that SLCs provided them with an insight into how medical camps are arranged [20].
Beyond community impact, our results indicate that SLCs help students apply theoretical knowledge to real-world clinical situations. Nearly three-quarters of participants agreed that SLCs increased their medical knowledge and clinical confidence, consistent with literature showing that students gain essential skills through direct patient care in student-led environments [6, 21, 22]. The structured supervision framework in our SLCs ensures that while students lead patient interactions, licensed physicians oversee all clinical decisions, balancing educational benefit with patient safety.
Notably, SLCs appear to support holistic, patient-centered care and interprofessional collaboration, key priorities in contemporary medical education. Volunteers highlighted improvements in empathy, communication, and teamwork, mirroring outcomes reported in both nursing and allied health student-led clinics [11, 23, 24]. Similar to these studies, providing volunteers with real-life clinical experience helped them develop a holistic, patient-centred approach and develop empathy, as evidenced by 93% of our volunteers who agreed. 86% of our volunteers also agreed that the shared experience significantly improves their ability to communicate professionally. Implementing volunteers into various aspects of SLCs such as pharmacy, counselling, awareness sessions and clinical duties offers a practice-based interprofessional education. A shared commitment to delivering care through various functional sections of SLCs provides comprehensive care for the patient whilst promoting interprofessional care. These interdisciplinary models emphasize collaborative decision-making, shared responsibility, and respect for diverse healthcare roles—practices our SLCs aim to foster.
Interestingly, younger students (ages 21–25) derived greater educational benefits from SLC participation compared to graduates, likely due to their limited clinical exposure within traditional curricula. This trend reflects global experiences where early-stage learners benefit from practical, community-based training to supplement academic instruction [12, 25]. In our context, volunteers are driven by personal commitment and interest in comparison to any curriculum obligations hence the mostly positive response from SLCs conducted here. The findings support the idea that SLCs are constructive components of medical practice, particularly for those in academic training [12, 26].
This study holds significant importance for both medical education and community healthcare. By analyzing the impact of SLCs on medical students, the study provides insights into how these programs can be optimized to better prepare future healthcare professionals for the complexities of modern healthcare delivery. Understanding the educational benefits of SLCs will inform curriculum design, ensuring that medical training is aligned with the needs of diverse and underserved populations. Ultimately, this study not only contributes to the academic discourse on medical education but also has the potential to influence policy and practice, promoting the integration of experiential learning opportunities like SLCs into medical curricula worldwide.
Despite these benefits, several limitations warrant consideration. The questionnaire, although expert-reviewed and pilot tested, did not undergo formal Delphi validation, which may have further strengthened content validity. Future studies should consider multi-round Delphi techniques involving a broader expert panel. Our study relied on student self-reported perceptions, introducing potential response and recall bias. While self-assessment encourages reflection, it may not objectively measure competency [23, 27].
The cross-sectional design limits causal inference and assessment of long-term educational impact. Selection bias is also possible, as participation in student-led clinics was voluntary they might be inclined toward community service, potentially skewing perceptions. Nevertheless, voluntary participation reflects the real-world nature of student-led clinics, and understanding educational outcomes within this context remains relevant for similar initiatives globally. Structural limitations of SLCs themselves also exist. Resource constraints restricted our SLCs to medical students only, limiting interdisciplinary learning opportunities. Variability in supervision, patient flow, and available services can affect learning quality. Moreover, balancing student education with safe, effective care delivery requires careful oversight. These challenges are echoed globally and highlight the need for robust protocols and faculty involvement. Future research should incorporate longitudinal designs, objective performance measures, and faculty or patient-reported outcomes to further validate and expand upon these findings [24, 28].
In resource-limited settings, SLC sustainability remains an ongoing challenge, with logistical, financial, and regulatory hurdles impacting long-term viability and scalability. Strengthening partnerships with community organizations and healthcare providers could enhance SLC integration into formal medical training and amplify their impact.
Conclusion
Student-led clinics (SLCs) offer medical students meaningful opportunities to apply clinical knowledge in real-world settings, particularly in resource-constrained environments. In our study, participants reported perceived improvements in their medical knowledge, patient care competencies, and awareness of healthcare challenges in underserved populations. SLCs may support medical education by encouraging interprofessional collaboration, leadership development, and reflective practice. While these clinics can also contribute to community health efforts, their broader impact warrants further investigation through longitudinal and multi-site studies.
Supplementary Information
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to Humanity Initiative, the Non-Governmental Organization working in Pakistan for conducting flood relief medical camps and supporting me in this regard. Humanity Initiative is a non-governmental organization (NGO) that relies solely on crowdsourcing and donations for its funding. It does not receive any financial support from governmental or corporate entities.
Abbreviations
- SLCs
Student-Led Clinics
Authors’ contributions
SMAA conceived the study, supervised the project, and led the writing of the original draft and manuscript revisions. SKF contributed to project administration, supervision, validation, and manuscript writing and revision. BL and SFA contributed to drafting the manuscript. AHN and MMHR contributed to manuscript review and editing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data availability
The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available with the corresponding author and will be shared upon reasonable request.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval and a waiver were granted by the Humanity Initiative Ethical Review Board (Approval number: HI-2023-0005-010524). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their participation. Individuals who declined consent were excluded from the study.
Consent for publication
Not applicable. No identifying images, personal data, or clinical details of participants are included in this manuscript.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Alowais SA, Alghamdi SS, Alsuhebany N, Alqahtani T, Alshaya AI, Almohareb SN, et al. Revolutionizing healthcare: the role of artificial intelligence in clinical practice. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):689. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Shahzad M, Upshur R, Donnelly P, Bharmal A, Wei X, Feng P, et al. A population-based approach to integrated healthcare delivery: a scoping review of clinical care and public health collaboration. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):708. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Phillips KA, Marshall DA, Adler L, Figueroa J, Haeder SF, Hamad R, et al. Ten health policy challenges for the next 10 years. Health Affairs Scholar. 2023;1(1):qxad010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Stuhlmiller CM, Tolchard B. Population health outcomes of a Student-Led free health clinic for an underserved population: A naturalistic study. J Community Health. 2018;43(1):193–200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.PrestesVargas J, Smith M, Chipchase L, Morris ME. Impact of interprofessional student led health clinics for patients, students and educators: a scoping review. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2025;30(1):321–45. 10.1007/s10459-024-10342-2. Epub 2024 Jun 6. PMID: 38842784; PMCID: PMC11925975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 6.Lilliecreutz C, Holm ACS, Dahlgren MA, Blomberg M. Student-led clinic cervical cancer screening—medical students’ views on progression of learning, quality of pap smears and women´s experiences of the visit – a mixed methods study. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):218. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Nagel DA, Naccarato TT, Philip MT, Ploszay VK, Winkler J, Sanchez-Ramirez DC, et al. Understanding Student-Run health initiatives in the context of Community-Based services: A concept analysis and proposed definitions. J Prim Care Community Health. 2022;13:21501319221126293. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Smith SD, Yoon R, Johnson ML, Natarajan L, Beck E. The effect of involvement in a student-run free clinic project on attitudes toward the underserved and interest in primary care. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2014;25(2):877–89. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Abidi SMA. The urgent need to address child malnutrition in rural areas of pakistan: lessons from the 2022 floods. J Pediatr Health Care. 2023;37(5):e11–2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kent F, Martin N, Keating JL. Interprofessional student-led clinics: an innovative approach to the support of older people in the community. J Interprof Care. 2016;30(1):123–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Adnan AI. Effectiveness of communication skills training in medical students using simulated patients or volunteer outpatients. Cureus. 2022;14(7):e26717. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Wilson OWA, Broman P, Tokolahi E, Andersen P, Brownie S. Learning outcomes from participation in Student-Run health clinics: A systematic review. J Multidisciplinary Healthc. 2023;16:143–57. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Prestes Vargas J, Smith M, Chipchase L, Morris ME. Impact of interprofessional student led health clinics for patients, students and educators: a scoping review. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2025;30(1):321–45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Ahmed FA, Martins RS, Ali D, Haroon MA, Mehmood A, Faruqui N. The impact of community medical camps on medical students and graduates’ education. J Pak Med Assoc. 2023;73(6):1183–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Nakamura M, Altshuler D, Binienda J. Clinical skills development in student-run free clinic volunteers: a multi-trait, multi-measure study. BMC Med Educ. 2014;14(1):250. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Rubenstein W, Rifkin R, Huber B, Pedowitz E, Rabkin J, Thomas D, et al. What drives faculty to volunteer at a student-run clinic for the underserved? J Student-Run Clin. 2016;2(1):1–6. 10.59586/jsrc.v2i1.9.
- 17.BromanP, Brownie S, Fourie L. Student-led health services in australia and new zealand: comparing the costs. J Glob Bus Technol. 2023;19(2):1–18. https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85184423883#.
- 18.Rupert DD, Alvarez GV, Burdge EJ, Nahvi RJ, Schell SM, Faustino FL. Student-run free clinics stand at a critical junction between undergraduate medical education, clinical care, and advocacy. Acad Med. 2022;97(6):824–31. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Abidi SMA, Nazeer AH, Rizvi MMH, Abidi STF. Improving quality of life in underserved communities: A case from humanity initiative’s Student-Led clinics. J Med Educ Curric Dev. 2024;11:23821205241297912. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Teherani A. On autonomy in student-run clinics. Med Educ. 2015;49(3):238–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.von Rohr S, Knitza J, Grahammer M, Schmalzing M, Kuhn S, Schett G, et al. Student-led clinics and ePROs to accelerate diagnosis and treatment of patients with axial spondyloarthritis: results from a prospective pilot study. Rheumatol Int. 2023;43(10):1905–11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Fröberg M, Leanderson C, Fläckman B, Hedman-Lagerlöf E, Björklund K, Nilsson GH, et al. Experiences of a student-run clinic in primary care: a mixed-method study with students, patients and supervisors. Scand J Prim Health Care. 2018;36(1):36–46. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Vidanapathirana M, Gomez D, Atukorala I. Impostor phenomenon and self- reported satisfaction among medical and surgical postgraduate trainees in Sri Lanka. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):1352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Noya F, Carr S, Thompson S. Social accountability in a medical school: is it sufficient? A regional medical school curriculum and approaches to equip graduates for rural and remote medical services. BMC Med Educ. 2024;24(1):526. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Rockey NG, Weiskittel TM, Linder KE, Ridgeway JL, Wieland ML. A mixed methods study to evaluate the impact of a student-run clinic on undergraduate medical education. BMC Med Educ. 2021;21(1):182. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Bird K, Stothers K, Armstrong E, Marika ED, Yunupingu MD, Brown L, et al. Marŋgithirri guŋga’yunarawu Ga guŋga’yunyarawu marŋgithinyarawu learning to connect and connecting to learn: Preparing the rural and remote allied health workforce through a co-created student-implemented service in East Arnhem, Australia. Aust J Rural Health. 2022;30(1):75–86. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Tyler J, Boldi M-O, Cherubini M. Contemporary self-reflective practices: A large-scale survey. Acta Psychol. 2022;230:103768. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Evans C. Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Rev Educ Res. 2013;83(1):70–120. [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available with the corresponding author and will be shared upon reasonable request.