In their journey to becoming doctors, students engage with a range of teachers and trainers. Among these are simulated patients (SPs), who, through role-playing, assist students to develop their communication and physical examination skills, in contexts of formative and summative assessments. This paper explores the teaching and learning relationship between medical students and SPs, and considers how this might affect feedback and assessment. 14 SPs were interviewed on the subject of medical students' professional identity development in 2014. Data were examined using narrative analysis in conjunction with positioning theory to identify the positions that SPs assigned to themselves and to students. Narrative analysis yielded three interpretative positioning themes: Occupational, familial and cultural and discursive and embodied positioning. The interview process revealed that SPs adopt different positions intra-and interpersonally. SPs appear to hold dissonant perceptions of students in terms relating to their emerging professional identities, which may confound assessment and feedback. Training should include reflections on the SP/student relationship to uncover potential biases and positions, giving SPs the opportunity to reflect on and manage their individual and occupational selves.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 February 2017.
All research outputs
#26,097,034
of 32,611,522 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#838
of 1,002 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#243,866
of 335,182 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#16
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,611,522 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,002 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,182 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
