ArticleThe clinical teacher2025
Involving Patients Throughout Sensitive Simulation.
Article in The clinical teacher, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Involving Patients Throughout Sensitive Simulation.The clinical teacher · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhile people with lived experience (PLE) are increasingly included in health professions education, their role in simulation often remains limited to narrative sharing. This initiative explored how involving PLE throughout the design and delivery of a pharmacy simulation on PrEP (a preventive HIV treatment) and sexual and gender diversity shaped students' learning about inclusive, person-centred communication in consultations involving stigma and marginalisation. APPROACH: A PrEP-related simulation involving a non-binary patient was integrated into a third-year pharmacy course. Sessions took place in a fully equipped lab replicating a community pharmacy, with 10 stations and professional actors as standardised patients. Six PLE informed learning objectives, scenario design and debriefing. One PLE trained the actors, observed simulations and participated in debriefings. Their involvement supported inclusive, person-centred communication around sexuality, gender diversity and HIV prevention. EVALUATION: A mixed-methods design assessed impact. Survey responses (n = 109) indicated increased confidence in PrEP-related care and strong appreciation for PLE's presence. Most students had little personal and professional exposure to PrEP, and 93% agreed the PLE enriched their learning. Interviews (n = 14) highlighted how PLE involvement helped demystify stigmatised topics, fostered self-reflection and emphasised the value of lived experience. Students noted enhanced realism and psychological safety. IMPLICATIONS: Involving PLE throughout simulation-from codesign to debriefing-helped reduce stigma, promote inclusive communication and enhance scenario authenticity. Students felt better prepared for consultations involving PrEP or sexual and gender diversity. This approach may help amplify the patient's voice in health education and could be adapted to other sensitive or stigmatised health topics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.