Patient and public engagement in the CanMEDS framework: Which patients? Which publics?

Abstract Introduction Medical education institutions increasingly employ patient and public engagement (PPE) to inform their learning activities. While this shift is highly welcome, it is equally important to consider whether and how patient and public perspectives have been incorporated in globally influential texts, such as the CanMEDS 2015 Physician Competency Framework, that govern the contexts in which these activities play out, particularly as this framework undergoes revision. Methods We explored PPE in the creation and revision of CanMEDS, applying textual analysis to an archive that included the current framework, its drafts and revision documents, earlier iterations (e.g. CanMEDS 2005 and 2000) and ancillary texts. We specifically examined patient and public involvement on committees, in expert working groups and in consultation processes. Results Findings indicate that despite stated desires to include ‘the perspectives of the people who depend on Canadian physicians for their health care’, there was minimal PPE in the 3‐year revision process that led to CanMEDS 2015. Although data on patient and public perspectives were included in the original CanMEDS 2000 framework, these were imported from a provincially focused project from more than 30 years ago. Conclusion If competency‐based medical education systems wish to realise their promise of meeting societal needs, they must embrace strategies that regularly centre the perspectives of the patients and publics who comprise that society in the design and content of their foundational frameworks. To do so effectively, it may be productive for the field to untangle patient engagement from public engagement and more purposefully apply the wisdom that each of these modalities offers.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medical Education
Published
2026-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.70306
Primary Topic
Mental Health and Patient Involvement
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Patient and public engagement in the CanMEDS framework: Which patients? Which publics?

Brett Schrewe, Maria Athina Martimianakis, Claudia W. Ruitenberg
Medical Education
Mental Health and Patient Involvement
article

Patient and public engagement in the CanMEDS framework: Which patients? Which publics?

Brett Schrewe, Maria Athina Martimianakis, Claudia W. Ruitenberg
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Medical education institutions increasingly employ patient and public engagement (PPE) to inform their learning activities. While this shift is highly welcome, it is equally important to consider whether and how patient and public perspectives have been incorporated in globally influential texts, such as the CanMEDS 2015 Physician Competency Framework, that govern the contexts in which these activities play out, particularly as this framework undergoes revision. Methods We explored PPE in the creation and revision of CanMEDS, applying textual analysis to an archive that included the current framework, its drafts and revision documents, earlier iterations (e.g. CanMEDS 2005 and 2000) and ancillary texts. We specifically examined patient and public involvement on committees, in expert working groups and in consultation processes. Results Findings indicate that despite stated desires to include ‘the perspectives of the people who depend on Canadian physicians for their health care’, there was minimal PPE in the 3‐year revision process that led to CanMEDS 2015. Although data on patient and public perspectives were included in the original CanMEDS 2000 framework, these were imported from a provincially focused project from more than 30 years ago. Conclusion If competency‐based medical education systems wish to realise their promise of meeting societal needs, they must embrace strategies that regularly centre the perspectives of the patients and publics who comprise that society in the design and content of their foundational frameworks. To do so effectively, it may be productive for the field to untangle patient engagement from public engagement and more purposefully apply the wisdom that each of these modalities offers.

Medical Education
University of British Columbia (CA), University of Toronto (CA), University of Victoria (CA), The Wilson Centre (CA)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Mental Health and Patient Involvement
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.