A longitudinal evaluation of final assessment feedback quality for medical imaging students on clinical placement

Introduction Clinical placement is central to medical imaging education, yet variability in supervision practices may influence written feedback quality. This study evaluated written feedback provided to undergraduate medical imaging students on clinical placement and explored relationships between feedback quality, assessment performance and clinical placement site characteristics. Method A quantitative observational retrospective study analysed placement assessment data from an undergraduate medical imaging program (n = 1146 assessment forms, 2022–2025). Written feedback was rated using a three-point framework: Limited, Adequate, or Extensive. Feedback quality was analysed overall, across year levels, and in relation to student performance. It was also examined according to clinical placement sector, public versus private and geographical location. Results 83% of assessments rated feedback as Adequate or Extensive, with no statistically significant difference between public and private clinical settings. Feedback quality varied across year levels; first year students received the highest proportion of extensive feedback. Feedback quality also varied non-linearly by remoteness of geographical location, with predominantly Adequate or Extensive feedback in metropolitan settings and increasing levels of Limited feedback in more remote locations. Analysis of student performance in subsequent placements indicated that overall placement marks were independent of the quality of feedback provided previously. Conclusion Written feedback quality met expected standards in most assessments, with no difference in clinical sectors. Limited feedback was most prevalent in Year 2 and increased with geographical remoteness. Student performance in subsequent placements was independent of written feedback quality. Implications for practice These findings establish a strong baseline of written feedback practice, identifying opportunities to improve consistency in feedback quality through targeted clinical educator development. Focused written feedback offers valuable insights into student clinical performance, informing ongoing curriculum refinement and supporting student learning and clinical development.