Involving people with lived experience in physiotherapy education – Research report two: Harnessing the expertise of people with lived experience

Article under review

This article is currently under peer review and has not yet been accepted for publication. While it may still be referenced at this web address, please bear in mind that amendments to the article may occur as a result of the review process.

Reviews

Please provide a review in the form of a summary that addresses the following main themes. Note that the purpose of the review process at OpenPhysio is not to act as a gatekeeper to knowledge but to help the author present the best possible version of their ideas. Your comments below may not necessarily be used to accept or reject the article but should rather aim to identify areas where the author/s can improve their work.

1. Complete, coherent, and well-organized presentation:

Well organized and written.

2. Sufficient explanation of the significance of the problem:

Identifies lack of literature on the current topic as mentioned in report 1.

3. Clear demonstration of the relevance to the field (beyond the case presented):

The benefits of including persons with lived experience and students into teaching and learning is identified in the introduction.

4. Original contribution to the topic of physiotherapy education:

Original report.

5. Compelling presentation of the problem within a theoretical framework (where appropriate):

In the discussion, a specific theory of learning is highlighted to support the findings.

6. Establishment of a relationship between the problem and other relevant literature:

Clear benefits from other sources of literature is included and clear links made to findings.

7. Appropriate research design and method:

N/A

8. Accurate and useful interpretation:

Discussion and conclusion accurately captures the main findings from the report.

9. Sound argument and analysis:

The findings give rise to the inclusion of transformative learning theory as support for the benefits of including persons with lived experience as well as students.

10. Effective conclusion about the implications for physiotherapy education, research, and/or practice:

Implications for practice is clear.

If, in addition to the points above, you could provide more detailed comments and feedback below, that would also be appreciated.

Abstract

Not provided.

Introduction/background

This has proven benefits of enabling students to gain insight and more humanised practice (Terry 2012, Turnbull and Weeley 2013, Feijoo-Cid et al. 2017).

Should the word “and” be replaced with “on a” ? If not, “gain insight” should be elaborated on.

There are significant benefits however from creating opportunities for students to draw on the expertise of people with lived experience by gaining feedback, support, and guidance on their continuing professional development and practice

I don’t think that the word “however” is needed in this sentence.

Muir and Laxton (2012), for example, when drawing on the expertise of people with lived experience in providing feedback to medical students, found that service user educators were able to bring different and valuable perspectives to the feedback.

I would elaborate on “different and valuable perspectives”.

Naylor et al. (2015) found that it made the exercise more relevant and meaningful for radiography students.

The use of the word “exercise” is confusing. I would rather say that these authors found that learning from a person with a lived experience was more relevant and meaningful to students’ practice.

Students pitched their physiotherapy innovation to the ‘dragons’ who were two PIER members and two members of the teaching team.

“members of the teaching team”- does this relate to other lecturers?

I would identify the speakers in brackets after their names. I found myself have to recall who each one was although it does become apparent as you read their words. I think it would reduce confusion if they are identified prior to their quote.

Discussion and Conclusion

Captured the results of the report well and draws on an existing theory of learning to support the findings.

Please provide a review in the form of a summary that addresses the following main themes. Note that the purpose of the review process at OpenPhysio is not to act as a gatekeeper to knowledge but to help the author present the best possible version of their ideas. Your comments below may not necessarily be used to accept or reject the article but should rather aim to identify areas where the author/s can improve their work.

1. Complete, coherent, and well-organized presentation: I thought that the report as a whole is well-structured. However, the section that includes the transcripts from each participant could be structured more effectively. I have commented on this below.

2. Sufficient explanation of the significance of the problem: The problem is clearly stated.

3. Clear demonstration of the relevance to the field: The relevance to practice and professional educators is clear.

4. Original contribution to the topic of physiotherapy education: The report forms part of a foundation in support of the idea that a true person-centred education programme should include input from all stakeholders.

5. Compelling presentation of the problem within a theoretical framework: Mezirow’s theory of transformative learning is appropriate in this context.

6. Establishment of a relationship between the problem and other relevant literature: The use of evidence to support decisions is appropriate.

7. Appropriate research design and method: N/A

8. Accurate and useful interpretation: The interpretation of participant transcripts is accurate and useful.

9. Sound argument and analysis: N/A

10. Effective conclusion about the implications for physiotherapy education, research, and/or practice: The conclusion is appropriate and based on the content of the report.

If, in addition to the points above, you could provide more detailed comments and feedback below, that would also be appreciated.

Abstract

No abstract provided.

Introduction

> case study

Change to ‘report’.

> Many published papers focusing on the involvement of people with lived experience in health and social care education focus on people sharing their stories.

I’m a little confused. In the previous paragraph you say that there are only 2 publications. But here you say there are many. Please clarify.

Report

I thought that this section was less-structured than the same section in the first report. I felt like that report was clear and concise, and I always knew where I was and where we were going. But this section felt like it went on for too long, and it wasn’t always clear what the participants were talking about. In other words, this part of the report feels less focused, particularly when read alongside the first report. What is the one message that you’re trying to convey in this report?

> a unit

Is a ‘unit’ the same as a ‘module’? Would all readers know what this is?

> dragon’s den

Previously formatted with capitals. Ensure consistent spelling throughout.

> Tom, Emma and Katey’s accounts illustrate the different perspectives from which we can view the same topic and the need to harness this in enabling students to develop their professional practice

I think that a possible reason for the sense of fragmentation in the report section, is that this transcript presents multiple perspectives on the same topic. I wonder if this could be more clearly signposted, either at the end of the introduction, or throughout the transcript section. I feel like there needs to be a narrative thread that carries the reader carefully through the multiple perspectives.

Discussion and conclusion

I think that a possible reason for the sense of fragmentation in the report section, is that this transcript presents multiple perspectives on the same topic. I wonder if this could be more clearly signposted, either at the end of the introduction, or throughout the transcript section. I feel like there needs to be a narrative thread that carries the reader carefully through the multiple perspectives.

> In the third and final paper of this series (Buckley, Fazakarley and Hughes 2022), we explore the development of equal partnerships and how when both the academic and the person with lived experience have genuine influence and control over the direction of a learning activity, all involved can benefit.

I think it’s better to wrap up the second report without trying to bridge it to the third. Each report should stand on it’s own. It’s fine to have a short piece in the introduction, noting that each piece is a part of a series, but after that, each report should be independent of the others.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.