↓ Skip to main content

Blurred boundaries: sexuality and power in standardised patients’ negotiations of the physical examination

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Simulation, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
19 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Blurred boundaries: sexuality and power in standardised patients’ negotiations of the physical examination
Published in
Advances in Simulation, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s41077-018-0069-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Grainne P. Kearney, Gerard J. Gormley, Diane Wilson, Jennifer L. Johnston

Abstract

Working with standardised or simulated patients (SPs) is now commonplace in Simulated Learning Environments. Embracing the fact that they are not a homogenous group, some literature suggests expansion of learning with SPs in health professional education by foregrounding their personal experiences. Intimate examination teaching, whether with or without the help of SPs, is protected by a particular degree of ceremony given the degree of potential vulnerability. However, other examinations may be equally intrusive for example the close proximity of an eye examination or a chest examination in a female patient. In this study, we looked at SPs' experiences of boundary crossing in any examinations, sensitised by Foucault's concept of the clinical gaze. We wished to problematise power relations that construct and subject SPs as clinical tools within simulation-based education. We collected data from 22 SPs, through five focus groups. Analysis was an iterative process, using thematic analysis. Data collection and reflexive analysis continued iteratively until concepts were fully developed and all theoretical directions explored. Students and SPs construct simulated teaching consultations by negotiating the unequal distribution of power between them. The SPs themselves discussed how they, perhaps unknowingly, acted in accordance with the discourse of the clinical gaze. However, SPs became disempowered when students deviated from the negotiated terms of consent and they used their agency to resist this. The SPs used strong sexual metaphors to express the subjugation they experienced, as discourses of sexuality and gender played out in the Simulated Learning Environment. We demonstrate that power dynamics and the clinical gaze can have important consequences within the Simulated Learning Environment. Every physical examination can be potentially 'intimate' and can therefore be underpinned by discourses of sexuality and gendered undertones. In partnership with SPs, simulation-based education should create a teaching space that no longer fosters the discourse of the clinical gaze but facilitates students to learn to reflectively navigate, in the moment, the fine line between touching patients versus touching loved ones, and the blurred boundaries that exist in the gulf between sexual contact and benevolent touch.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 19 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 24 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 5 21%
Student > Master 4 17%
Lecturer 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Librarian 1 4%
Other 4 17%
Unknown 6 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 38%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 17%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Psychology 1 4%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 26 February 2019.
All research outputs
#2,486,466
of 23,092,602 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Simulation
#114
of 235 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,624
of 329,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Simulation
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,092,602 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 235 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its peers.
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 329,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.