title: A systematic review of evidence relating to clinical supervision for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to systematically review evidence relating to clinical supervision for nurses, midwives and allied health professionals.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  Since 1902 statutory supervision has been a requirement for UK midwives, but this is due to change. Evidence relating to clinical supervision for nurses and allied health professions could inform a new model of clinical supervision for midwives.
  
  
  METHODS
  A systematic review with a contingent design, comprising a broad map of research relating to clinical supervision and two focussed syntheses answering specific review questions.
  
  
  METHODS
  Electronic databases were searched from 2005 - September 2015, limited to English-language peer-reviewed publications.
  
  
  METHODS
  Systematic reviews evaluating the effectiveness of clinical supervision were included in Synthesis 1. Primary research studies including a description of a clinical supervision intervention were included in Synthesis 2. Quality of reviews were judged using a risk of bias tool and review results summarized in tables. Data describing the key components of clinical supervision interventions were extracted from studies included in Synthesis 2, categorized using a reporting framework and a narrative account provided.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Ten reviews were included in Synthesis 1; these demonstrated an absence of convincing empirical evidence and lack of agreement over the nature of clinical supervision. Nineteen primary studies were included in Synthesis 2; these highlighted a lack of consistency and large variations between delivered interventions.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Despite insufficient evidence to directly inform the selection and implementation of a framework, the limited available evidence can inform the design of a new model of clinical supervision for UK-based midwives.
authors.affiliation: Nursing Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, Glasgow Caledonian University, UK.
authors.forename: Alex
authors.identifier: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4941-7985
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Pollock
authors.affiliation: Nursing Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, Glasgow Caledonian University, UK.
authors.forename: Pauline
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Campbell
authors.affiliation: Institute of Healthcare Policy and Practice, University of the West of Scotland, UK.
authors.forename: Ruth
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Deery
authors.affiliation: School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Care, Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.
authors.forename: Mick
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Fleming
authors.affiliation: Health, Nursing and Midwifery, University of the West of Scotland, UK.
authors.forename: Jean
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Rankin
authors.affiliation: NHS Ayrshire and Arran, Ayr, UK.
authors.forename: Graham
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Sloan
authors.affiliation: Nursing Midwifery and Allied Health Professions Research Unit, University of Stirling, UK.
authors.forename: Helen
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Cheyne
mesh_terms: D000488:Allied Health Personnel / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000592:standards; D002983:Clinical Competence / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D009721:Nurse Midwives / Q000458:organization & administration / Q000592:standards; D009726:Nurses / Q000458:organization & administration* / Q000592:standards
keywords: allied health professionals; clinical supervision; literature review; midwives; nurses; systematic review