Abstract
Objective Patient involvement is used to describe the inclusion of patients as active participants in healthcare. This study aimed to investigate incoming Year 1 medicine (MBChB) students’ attitudes and opinions regarding patient involvement in healthcare and research.
Methods We partnered with four Year 2 MBChB students in formulating the design of an online survey. All incoming Year 1 MBChB students (n = 333) were invited to complete the survey before formal teaching commenced. The survey included Likert scale questions and three short vignette scenarios which were designed to probe student attitudes towards patient involvement linked to existing legal precedent.
Results 15% of invited students responded. The data indicate that participants were broadly familiar with, and supportive of, patient involvement in medical treatment. There was least support for patient involvement in conducting (22.4%), contributing to (34.7%) or communicating research (30.6%), although there was unanimous support for patients’ lived experiences of innovative treatment shaping future practice (100%).
Conclusion Incoming members of the medical profession demonstrate awareness of the need to actively involve patients in healthcare decision-making but are unfamiliar with the utility and value of such involvement in research. Further empirical studies are required to examine attitudes to patient involvement in healthcare.
Manuscript Revision This pre-print represents the second version of this manuscript, which has been submitted for peer-review.
Summary of minor changes made to version 2:
General formatting
Amended spelling (from UK English to US English)
Minor changes to the references section (including the removal of inconsistencies and the addition of the missing reference for Duce v Worcestershire Acute Hospitals 2008 EWCA Civ 1307 (Eng.)).
Removal of text duplication in the Discussion section and re-phrasing of the remaining text to accommodate this change.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study did not receive any funding.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approval for this study was obtained from the University of Glasgow College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences (MVLS) Ethics Committee for Non-clinical Research Involving Human Participants [No: 200210131] and the informed consent of all participants obtained.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Manuscript Revision This pre-print represents the second version of this manuscript, which has been submitted for peer-review. Summary of minor changes made to version 2: General formatting Amended spelling (from UK English to US English) Minor changes to the references section (including the removal of inconsistencies and the addition of the missing reference for Duce v Worcestershire Acute Hospitals 2008 EWCA Civ 1307 (Eng.)). Removal of text duplication in the Discussion section and re-phrasing of the remaining text to accommodate this change.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are available upon reasonable request to the authors.
