Frontiers in health services · 2026
The patient as teacher: a four-phase blueprint for institutional change.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wollmann Lucas, Wolf Axel, Cooke Lara, Santana Maria
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Over recent decades, patient involvement in medical education has shifted from passive case demonstrations toward active partnerships in teaching, assessment, and curriculum design, a transition that must recognize patients and relatives as persons with experiential knowledge, not merely as educational instruments. This perspective article argues that accumulated evidence now justifies a deliberate shift from scattered, champion-driven initiatives to embedded institutional strategy.
EVIDENCE AND GAPS: The evidence supports meaningful benefits across stakeholders: learners develop stronger clinical reasoning, communication skills, and empathy; patient educators report empowerment and enhanced self-esteem; and institutions advance their social accountability mission. However, the field continues to struggle with inconsistent terminology, fragmented implementation, short-term satisfaction-based outcomes, underexplored ethical considerations, and weak institutional commitment.
PROPOSED ROADMAP: To address these gaps, we propose a four-phase implementation roadmap. Phase 1 (Institutional Diagnosis) maps current practices against Towle et al.'s six-level taxonomy and establishes an institutional position statement. Phase 2 (Role Definition and Phased Goal-Setting) advocates stepwise progression, typically starting at Levels 3-4, where patients share experiences or act as trained teachers, advancing toward full curriculum governance partnership. Phase 3 (Implementation Planning and Capacity Building) addresses curriculum integration, resource allocation, faculty development, and community partnerships. Phase 4 (Outcomes Monitoring and Evaluation) calls for multilevel, longitudinal evaluation frameworks, including systematic assessment of patient educators' experiences.
DISCUSSION: We present this roadmap as an evidence-informed conceptual synthesis whose implementation depends on continued institutional commitment. Cross-cutting principles include incrementalism, sustained institutional commitment, patient co-production, representative recruitment, and rigorous longitudinal research.
EVIDENCE AND GAPS: The evidence supports meaningful benefits across stakeholders: learners develop stronger clinical reasoning, communication skills, and empathy; patient educators report empowerment and enhanced self-esteem; and institutions advance their social accountability mission. However, the field continues to struggle with inconsistent terminology, fragmented implementation, short-term satisfaction-based outcomes, underexplored ethical considerations, and weak institutional commitment.
PROPOSED ROADMAP: To address these gaps, we propose a four-phase implementation roadmap. Phase 1 (Institutional Diagnosis) maps current practices against Towle et al.'s six-level taxonomy and establishes an institutional position statement. Phase 2 (Role Definition and Phased Goal-Setting) advocates stepwise progression, typically starting at Levels 3-4, where patients share experiences or act as trained teachers, advancing toward full curriculum governance partnership. Phase 3 (Implementation Planning and Capacity Building) addresses curriculum integration, resource allocation, faculty development, and community partnerships. Phase 4 (Outcomes Monitoring and Evaluation) calls for multilevel, longitudinal evaluation frameworks, including systematic assessment of patient educators' experiences.
DISCUSSION: We present this roadmap as an evidence-informed conceptual synthesis whose implementation depends on continued institutional commitment. Cross-cutting principles include incrementalism, sustained institutional commitment, patient co-production, representative recruitment, and rigorous longitudinal research.