Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32718925›Full record

SynthesisBMJ open2020

Role of active patient involvement in undergraduate medical education: a systematic review.

Stijntje Willemijn Dijk, Edwin Johan Duijzer, Matthias Wienold

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 99 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

99 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Public participation in healthcare students' education: An umbrella review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. A theoretical systematic review of patient involvement in health and social care education.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2023
    Pooled it
  6. Meaningful patient and public involvement in digital health innovation, implementation and evaluation: A systematic review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. "Engagement Is Not One-Dimensional": The Multiple Roles of Patient Educators With Physical Disabilities in Family Medicine.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Harnessing lived experience in health professions simulation-based education: a scoping review.Advances in health sciences education : theory and practice · 2026
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

39 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Stijntje Willemijn DijkErasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Zuid-Holland, Netherlands 340974sd@student.eur.nl.ORCID 0000-0003-2905-4128
Edwin Johan DuijzerUniversity Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
Matthias WienoldWissenschaftliche Dienste und Projektberatung, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo identify the scope of active patient involvement in medical education, addressing the current knowledge gaps relating to rationale and motivation for involvement, recruitment and preparation, roles, learning outcomes and key procedural contributors.

methodsThe authors performed a systematic search of the PubMed database of publications between 2003 and 2018. Original studies in which patients take on active roles in the development, delivery or evaluation of undergraduate medical education and written in English were eligible for inclusion. Included studies' references were searched for additional articles. Quality of papers was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

results49 articles were included in the review. Drivers for patient involvement included policy requirements and patients' own motivations to contribute to society and learning. Patients were engaged in a variety of educational settings in and outside of the hospital. The vast majority of studies describe patients taking on the role of a patient teacher and formative assessor. More recent studies suggest that patients are increasingly involved in course and curriculum development, student selection and summative assessment. The new body of empirical evidence shows the wide range of learning objectives was pursued through patient participation, including competencies as professional, communicator, collaborator, leader and health advocate, but not scholar. Measures to support sustainable patient involvement included longitudinal institutional incorporation, patient recruitment and/or training, resource support and clear commitment by faculty. The importance and advantages of patient involvement were highlighted by students, faculty and patients themselves; however, organisations must continue to consider, monitor and take steps to mitigate any potential harms to patients and students. DISCUSSION: This systematic review provides new knowledge and practical insights to physicians and faculty on how to incorporate active patient involvement in their institutions and daily practice, and provides suggested action points to patient organisations wishing to engage in medical education.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduateFacultyHumansLearningPatient Participationeducation & training (see medical education & training)health services administration & managementmedical education & training

Identifiers

PMID32718925
PMCPMC7389514

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.