The practice of clinical supervision (CS) is recommended for allied health professionals. Preliminary evidence suggests that CS can be effective, but it is unknown for which allied health professions it is most effective.The effectiveness of CS was measured using the allied health-specific modified Manchester Clinical Supervision Scale (MCSS-26). Subscales of the MCSS-26 were summed for three domain scores (normative, restorative and formative).One hundred ninety-six allied health professionals working in seven disciplines completed the survey. Allied health profession and supervisor experience had a significant effect on total MCSS-26 score (p=0.004 and 0.001, respectively). Allied health professions scored significantly lower in the normative domain than the restorative domain (mean diff 6.0%, 95%CI 3.3 to 8.7, p<0.001) and the formative domain (mean diff 7.9%, 95%CI 5.7 to 10.1, p<0.001).A significant difference exists between allied health professions in the effectiveness of CS, with social workers, psychologists, and occupational therapists reporting effective supervision, while the effectiveness of CS for physiotherapists, dieticians, podiatrists, and speech-language pathologists was uncertain. All professions reported that CS was least effective in the normative domain, indicating that it was difficult to find time to participate in CS.