The acronym “SP” is widely used in simulation-based education, yet its meaning varies across contexts, referring at different times to standardized patient, simulated patient, simulated participant, or simulated person. This commentary traces the historical evolution of SP terminology from Barrows and Abrahamson’s “programmed patient” through contemporary usage reflected in the Healthcare Simulation Dictionary. Using literary and philosophical touchstones, we examine what is meant by standardized, simulated, participant, and person, and why these distinctions matter for fairness, assessment, psychological safety, and educational intent. The commentary highlights tensions between reproducibility and personhood, clarifies appropriate terminology for formative versus summative simulation contexts, and briefly considers questions posed by the emergence of AI-generated simulated participants. Greater intentionality and consistency in SP terminology across curricula, scholarship, and professional guidance may strengthen shared understanding and trust within the simulation community.
Pradhan et al. (Thu,) studied this question.