“…These potentialities have been described as (re) knowing health problems (A1 (11) , A2 (12) , A5 (15) , A6 (16) ) and establishing behaviors according to the patients' living conditions by listening feelings of the relationship with patients and their relatives (A1 (11) ); to develop interaction, bonding and reflection on the health needs of families and to allow a broader view of the determinants of the health-disease process, including socioeconomic, environmental, physical and emotional health (A2 (12) , A3 (13) , A5 (15) , A3 (16); in the extra class spaces, the student experiences the facts and presents more conditions to make the diagnosis and the treatment appropriate to the reality of the patients; Encouraging the student to become a more autonomous subject in the process of formation in contexts of uncertainties and complexities (A3 (13) ); it allows students to develop hypotheses, socialize and become active subjects in the construction of their knowledge, to promote meaningful learning (A4 (14) ); to allow the attachment of the student to the family and promotes the humanization of care, based on the affective and trusting relationship (A6 (16) ). Regarding the weaknesses, the studies present different factors, such as a feeling of impotence in the social needs of the patients, in which the possibility of interdisciplinary and cross-sectorial attention is not known as mediator of the health care and difficulty of understanding the student´s role as facilitator of the family bond (A (11) ); need for greater organization and planning of the home visit (A2 (12) ); home visits are sporadic and of short duration, often carried out focusing on the individual and not on the family. Moreover, they do not enable to establish a social commitment and to create strong bonds, since the student´s involvement with the family is of short duration (A5 (15) , A6 (16) ).…”