Cited by 54Innovations in Medical EducationSimulation-Based Education in HealthcareMusculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation

The use of patient partners with back pain to teach undergraduate medical students

Haq, I., Fuller, J., Dacre, J.·2006·Rheumatology

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of teaching about back pain to medical students using trained patient partners (PP). METHODS: An initial training programme for four PPs (two with sciatica and two with ankylosing spondylitis) followed by teaching to alternate groups of medical students at the Whittington Campus of the Royal Free and University College Medical School (RFUCMS). A control group of students did not receive the PP teaching. All students received standard Whittington Campus rheumatology teaching. Performance in an end of year objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) was compared between the two groups. Student and PP perceptions of the teaching and training were evaluated using focus groups and questionnaires. RESULTS: Students receiving the PP teaching performed significantly better in a summative OSCE, but no difference was seen in analysis of a single station assessing history-taking skills in a patient with back pain. Students felt that the PP teaching improved their ability to elicit information from a patient during the consultation. PPs enjoyed the experience of teaching and felt empowered to self-manage their medical conditions, and were better able to seek medical advice when needed. CONCLUSIONS: Using PPs with back pain to teach medical students has a positive effect on student learning and patient well-being. The feasibility of delivering this programme will depend on faculty resources. The effects on examination performance are small but significant.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/rheumatology/kei167

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Haq, I., Fuller, J., & Dacre, J.
Affiliations
University College Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Haq, I.
ORCID
Haq, I.
Venue
Rheumatology
Published
2005-10-25
Volume
45
Issue
4
Pages
430-434
ISSN
  • 1462-0324 (ISSN-L)
  • 1462-0332
OpenAlex
W2124590256
Cited by
54
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 5 · 2012: 6
FWCI
2.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Lara D. Veeken (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Musculoskeletal Disorders and Rehabilitation
Keywords
patient partners, back pain, undergraduate medical education, patient education, sciatica, ankylosing spondylitis, OSCE, history-taking skills, patient-physician communication, patient empowerment, patient well-being
MeSH terms
Adult, Attitude of Health Personnel, Attitude to Health, Back Pain, Clinical Competence, Communication, Education, Medical, Undergraduate, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patients, Physician-Patient Relations, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sciatica, Spondylitis, Ankylosing, Students, Medical, Teaching

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