Cited by 99Innovations in Medical EducationMental Health and Patient InvolvementEmpathy and Medical Education

"User involvement is a sine qua non, almost, in medical education": learning with rather than just about health and social care service users

Open access
Rees, C. E., Knight, L. V., Wilkinson, C. E.·2007·Advances in Health Sciences Education

Abstract

Despite the General Medical Council emphasising the value of service users to medical students' education, there is scant literature about service user involvement in medical education. Although some research has outlined the effectiveness of service users as teachers, none has explored social issues surrounding how medical students learn 'with' rather than just 'about' service users. Incorporating insights from contemporary socio-cultural learning theory, this study examines the views and experiences of 47 stakeholders (comprising 19 service users, 13 medical students and 15 medical educators) concerning service user involvement in medical education. Eight audiotaped focus group discussions were convened and the audiotapes were transcribed. The transcripts and audiotapes were independently analysed by multiple researchers using Framework analysis. Seven content- and five process-orientated themes emerged from the analysis. Content-related themes included the costs and benefits of service user involvement in medical education and process-related themes included the use and function of humour and metaphor. In this paper, we focus primarily on the content-related themes. We discuss these findings in light of the existing service user involvement literature and contemporary socio-cultural learning theory and provide implications for further research and educational practice. We encourage educators to involve service users in medical education but only in a considered way.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10459-006-9007-5

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 59 · Cited by 99

Authors
Rees, C. E., Knight, L. V., & Wilkinson, C. E.
Affiliations
  • University of Exeter (GB)
  • University of the West of England (GB)
Corresponding author
Rees, C. E.
Venue
Advances in Health Sciences Education
Published
2006-07-14
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
359-390
ISSN
  • 1382-4996 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-1677
OpenAlex
W2081444595
Cited by
99
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 3
FWCI
3.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Advances in Health Sciences Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Discovery Research Portal (University of Dundee) (publishedVersion)
  • UWE Research Repository (UWE Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mental Health and Patient Involvement
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Empathy and Medical Education
Keywords
service user involvement, medical education, medical students, sociocultural theory, stakeholder perspectives
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Attitude to Health, Clinical Clerkship, Community Participation, Education, Medical, Faculty, Medical, Female, United Kingdom, Health Policy, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Preceptorship, Professional-Patient Relations, Psychology, Educational, Social Work, Focus Groups, Qualitative Research, Cultural Competency

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review