Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34842290›Full record

ReviewMedical education2022

Optimising planned medical education strategies to develop learners' person-centredness: A realist review.

Aarti Bansal, Sarah Greenley, Caroline Mitchell, Sophie Park, Katie Shearn, Joanne Reeve

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. From 'Little Things' to 'Seagulls': A Mixed Methods Exploration of Patients' Experiences of Person-Centred Compassionate Care in General Medical and Surgical Wards.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The Fallacy of Person-Centred Care: Deconstructing the Discourse to Reimagine Practice.Nursing philosophy : an international journal for healthcare professionals · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Research Paper of the Year: relevance to the broader primary care team.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Lazarus: working together to reclaim general practice.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Aarti BansalAcademy of Primary Care, Hull York Medical School, University of Hull, Hull, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1020-2805
Sarah GreenleyInstitute of Clinical and Applied Health Research, University of Hull, Hull, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3788-6437
Caroline MitchellAcademic Unit of Medical Education, Sam Fox House, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4790-0095
Sophie ParkResearch Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1521-2052
Katie ShearnHealth and Wellbeing Research Institute - Postgraduate Research Centre, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7209-8404
Joanne ReeveAcademy of Primary Care, Hull York Medical School, University of Hull, Hull, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3184-7955

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextPerson-centeredness is a stated aim for medical education; however, studies suggest this is not being achieved. There is a gap in our understanding of how, why and in what circumstances medical education interventions that aim to develop person-centredness are successful.

methodsA realist review was conducted with a search of Medline, Embase, HMIC and ERIC databases and the grey literature using the terms 'medical education' and 'person-centred' and related synonyms. Studies that involved a planned educational intervention in medical education with data on outcomes related to person-centredness were included. The analysis focused on how and why different educational strategies interact with biomedical learner perspectives to trigger mechanisms that may or may not lead to a change in perspective towards person-centredness.

resultsSixty-one papers representing fifty-three interventions were included in the final synthesis. Nine context-intervention-mechanism-outcome configuration (CIMOc) statements generated from the data synthesis make up our refined programme theory. Where educational interventions focused on communication skills learning or experiences without person-centred theory, learners experienced dissonance with their biomedical perspective which they resolved by minimising the importance of the learning, resulting in perspective endurance. Where educational interventions applied person-centred theory to meaningful experiences and included support for sense making, learners understood the relevance of person-centeredness and felt able to process their responses to learning, resulting in perspective transformation towards person-centredness.

conclusionOur findings offer explanations as to why communication skills-based interventions may be insufficient to develop learners' person-centredness. Integrating experiential person-centred learning with theory on why person-centredness matters to clinical practice and enabling learners to make sense of their responses to learning, may support perspective transformation towards person-centredness. Our findings offer programme and policymakers testable theory to inform the development of medical education strategies that aim to support person-centredness.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalHumansLearningPatient-Centered CareProblem-Based Learning

Identifiers

PMID34842290
PMCPMC9306905

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.