ArticleBMC medical education2025
Exploring patient involvement in obstetrics and gynaecology medical education: a scoping review.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pelvic Examination in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review.The clinical teacher · 2026Article
- A combined PBL and flipped classroom intervention enhances self-directed learning ability and empathy in ophthalmology undergraduates.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe benefit of patient involvement in medical education has been widely described. In particular, patient story-telling and sharing of personal experiences has been shown to increase study empathy and connection to patients. Patient involvement in obstetrics and gynaecology requires particular consideration with regard to patient dignity and autonomy. This scoping review aims to explore the context of patient involvement in medical education of this specialty to date, with a view to identifying gaps in the current provision of training and amplifying the patient voice and perspective in an ethical way.
methodsA search was carried out across nine databases to identify studies pertaining to patient involvement in medical education in obstetrics and gynaecology. Studies from 1960 to 2025 were included. Patient involvement was categorised according to Towle's "Spectrum of patient involvement". Benefits to students from patient involvement were examined. Details regarding patient recruitment, consent, compensation and debriefing were recorded in order to ascertain the ways in which patient safety and wellbeing was cared for in each study.
resultsThe search identified fifty-three studies for final analysis. Most studies detailed patient involvement with regard to the demonstration and teaching of pelvic examination (n = 48). Few studies gave details on patient consent for participation (n = 12). The benefits to students from patient contact were clear with the majority of studies showing benefits (n = 51) in terms of either examination skills, empathy levels or interpersonal skills development. Few studies referenced patient training (n = 11) prior to participation or patient debriefing (n = 7).
conclusionTo date, patient involvement in medical education in this specialty has been largely confined to the demonstration and teaching of pelvic examination skills. Given the rich and diverse experiences of those seeking care in obstetrics and gynaecology, improvements could be made to place more emphasis on personal experiences and education delivered by patients themselves. Patient consent and respect for patient well-being should be of paramount importance in the context of any involvement in medical education. Future initiatives involving patients should ensure to explicitly define and outline how the protection, dignity and well-being of patients is ensured throughout their involvement in educational programmes.
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.