Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40012121›Full record

ArticleThe clinical teacher2025

Patient Safety: Developing and Evaluating a Workshop for Preclinical Students.

Kirsty Matthews, Millie Pierce

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The clinical teacher, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Kirsty MatthewsWarwick Medical School, Coventry, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4345-0217
Millie PierceWarwick Medical School, Coventry, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-2161-207X

Funding

University of Warwick
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPatient safety is a core feature of undergraduate medical education, yet literature shows its implementation in curricula to be challenging and variable. Through the pilot and evaluation of an 'Introduction to Patient Safety' workshop, this project presents an initiative of how to address this curriculum challenge. Student-patient collaboration was championed in workshop design and delivery, addressing a regrettable lack of patient involvement to-date. APPROACH: Workshop activities were designed to hold authentic patient voice as central and to encourage interactivity. Storytelling was used to build empathy with the range of individuals involved in patient safety. Additionally, a gameshow-inspired activity highlighted key ideas from our patient advisory group. Responding to evaluation, the session was adapted and delivered by student facilitators to a full cohort. Advice on how to act, should students observe a patient safety incident, was incorporated. EVALUATION: Evaluation was comprehensive and multi-faceted. Pilot workshop attendees participated in semi-structured interviews, with the transcripts thematically analysed. Additionally, both authors produced a written reflection, and their academic supervisor fed back on the session recording. After full-cohort delivery, questionnaire feedback was also collected; 88% of 117 respondents rated the session at least 4 out of 5 (5 = very good). IMPLICATIONS: The workshop has since been integrated into Warwick Medical School's core curriculum. Designed and delivered by medical students, this project has shown the significant impact medical students can have in contributing meaningfully to undergraduate curriculum development. Medical students hold a unique position within healthcare settings to be powerful drivers of patient safety.

Indexed as

Education, Medical, UndergraduatePatient SafetyStudents, MedicalCurriculumHumansPilot ProjectsProgram Evaluationmedical studentspatient safetypeer and near‐peer educationprofessionalism

Identifiers

PMID40012121
PMCPMC11865627

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.