Connect clinical calculations, OTC and community-pharmacy consultations, pathology and practice labs with stage-matched fictional patients, prescribing decisions, documentation, reflection and an unfamiliar repeat case.
Medicine in Practice uses one diagnostic and gap-closure engine. The timetable changes for each education route, but the learning method and evidence language stay consistent.
Connect university teaching, supervised workplace activity and registration-assessment preparation without creating a separate product.
A gap is not closed because teaching was viewed. It moves from detected to confirmed, taught, demonstrated, transferred and retained. Where evidence remains mixed, the report recommends a supervisor discussion rather than making a competence judgement.
Programme teams can see where support is needed without collapsing exam preparation, workplace performance and prescribing development into one misleading score.
Knowledge application, calculations and performance on unseen and delayed checks.
Patient assessment, prioritisation, documentation, escalation and transfer across settings.
Information gathering, option appraisal, monitoring and accountable supervised prescribing proposals.
Students move beyond knowing an answer in isolation and apply it through a structured consultation to a fictional patient, record and prescribing decision.
Six teaching levels, a mixed diagnostic, configurable mocks, worked methods, safety checks and a personal mistake queue across 646 questions.
Open calculationsTake a structured minor-illness history, check OTC safety and special groups, recognise red flags, choose self-care, Pharmacy First or referral, and safety-net clearly.
Request the right blood tests from a patient record, give useful clinical details, interpret trends, set urgency and close the result loop.
Connect consultation, calculation and monitoring to prescription review, clinical prioritisation and documentation across 1686+ scored fictional activities.
Explore the practice labsThese are formative learning environments. They support teaching and feedback but do not independently establish prescribing competence or authorisation.
The design tests whether feedback changes the student’s next decision with a different fictional patient.
Choose a stage to see how taught knowledge, expected activity and simulated colleague behaviour can change.
Adherence, cardiovascular, respiratory, infection, minor illness, OTC safety, clinical numeracy and early monitoring.
The colleague helps when asked and uses targeted questions instead of giving the answer.
Authorised staff can move from curriculum intent to calculations, labs, assignment, cohort access and proportionate evaluation.
Cohort stage, current support, suitable reviewed cases and the next teaching task.
Year or block, taught knowledge, permitted activity and dated changes in support.
Stage-matched calculations, OTC and community consultation, pathology, prescribing and clinical-system practice.
Exact reviewed versions, practice-and-repeat pairs and completion expectations.
Stage-separated access and pathways without taking ownership of a learner’s private record.
Participation, first-to-repeat change, experience, accessibility and educator burden.
Approval state, data boundaries, implementation evidence and integration roadmap.
Can provide valuable rehearsal of rapport, questioning, explanation and communication under pressure.
Adds calculations, OTC and community-pharmacy decisions, pathology and practice labs, the surrounding fictional record, supervised prescribing proposals, documentation, private reflection and equivalent repeats.
This is a complementary proposition, not a claim that another platform, including SimConverse, should be replaced. DMU’s published 2025 SimConverse abstract informs the co-design discussion; the university team would validate the final relationship and evaluation. Read the cited abstract.
A student can use the free experience and build a private pathway without university input. Paid independent access appears only when the released subscription entitlement is available.
The university can fund named access, publish a stage pathway and assign reviewed activity while the student retains a separate private career record.
Each route is quoted against cohort size, duration, educator support and agreed reporting. We do not publish a made-up university price before those requirements are known.
Use one module, block or MPharm year. The duration and evaluation point are agreed after curriculum mapping.
Give one full year group a maintained pathway with staged support and lecturer controls.
Extend a validated approach across years or programmes without forcing every stage into one design.
Quotes should state learner numbers, named-access period, educator support, reporting fields, review responsibilities, VAT position and renewal or expansion terms before purchase.
Each offer uses the same governed platform and can begin with one cohort before wider adoption.
A mixed diagnostic, focused probes and an anonymised cohort gap map before targeted teaching begins.
A route-specific schedule connecting final-year or integrated teaching with supervised workplace application.
Targeted remediation followed by unseen application and delayed retention checks.
Private diagnosis, focused teaching and fresh evidence without claiming to know the learner's official answer-level result.
Pair one integrated or sandwich route with one conventional 4 + 1 route. Configure 8 to 12 gap pathways, include unseen and delayed re-tests, and agree the reporting fields before launch.
Start with one year, module or teaching block. Agree the map, duration and measures, freeze the reviewed content versions and decide together whether to expand.
Confirm outcomes, taught knowledge, activity boundaries and accessibility needs.
Select up to four practice-and-repeat case pairs and the support schedule.
Onboard the cohort, support educators and monitor only the agreed measures.
Review transfer, confidence calibration, experience, accessibility and workload.
A 60-minute curriculum and implementation workshop can agree the learner stage, module, capability, case pair, reporting boundary and evaluation measures before any commitment.
Medicine in Practice is an independent training provider. This page does not represent university approval, accreditation, a competence decision or prescribing authorisation.
