# A Scoping Review of Active Service User Involvement in Undergraduate Allied Health Professions Education

## TL;DR

This review maps how service users are involved in teaching allied health students and finds most participation is limited to classroom activities rather than curriculum design.

## Contribution

The study systematically maps types and levels of service user involvement in AHP education using standardized frameworks to identify implementation gaps.

## Key findings

- Most service user involvement occurs in teaching delivery rather than curriculum design
- Only 2 of 25 studies involved service users in curriculum design
- No studies measured long-term clinical outcomes of service user involvement

## Abstract

The inclusion of Service User Involvement (SUI) in higher education, particularly within Allied Health Professions (AHP) programs, has been increasingly mandated by professional standards globally. This scoping review aimed to systematically map existing literature on active SUI in undergraduate AHP education to identify types of involvement activities, how involvement is measured and to identify gaps in the current evidence base.

Using PRISMA‐ScR, a comprehensive search was conducted across five major databases; OVID Medline, OVID Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycINFO alongside grey literature. Analysis of results was framed using Towle's taxonomy and the Kirkpatrick evaluation model.

Twenty‐five studies met the inclusion criteria. Most involvement was with occupational therapy students (n = 13) followed by physiotherapy students (n = 7). Most studies documented SUI primarily in teaching delivery (n = 20), with less involvement in curriculum design (n = 2). The review highlighted limited engagement at higher levels of Towle's taxonomy, where they act as equal partners in educational processes. Regarding the Kirkpatrick model, most measured impact by immediate reactions (Level 1) or learning outcomes (Level 2), and few explored changes in student behaviour (Level 3). None of the included studies measured long‐term clinical outcomes (Level 4). Variability in terminology and practices was reported.

This scoping review highlights the increasing value of (SUI) in undergraduate AHP education. Addressing barriers and standardising implementation are key to advancing meaningful engagement. Future research should explore the long‐term impact of SUI on clinical practice and patient outcomes.

A special interest group of service‐users were regularly consulted. They provided feedback on the search terms and all draft versions of the review.