An effective healthcare workforce capable of responding to the evolving needs of the population is fundamental to a well-functioning society. The development of such a workforce requires sustained investment, long-term commitment and a structured approach to education and training, aligned with NHS strategic plans. The responsibility for educating health professionals extends far beyond universities. Much learning occurs within clinical environments, facilitated by practitioners only a few years senior and often still in training. This model reflects the integrated nature of healthcare education but also highlights the need for robust pedagogical grounding to ensure consistency and quality across diverse settings. Over the past two decades, there has been a global recognition that health professions education cannot rely solely on the traditional ‘see one, do one, teach one’ approach. Master of Health Professions Education (MHPE) programmes have expanded rapidly in response to this recognition, with an estimated twentyfold increase in their number worldwide 1-3. This expansion has been accompanied by policy shifts from key regulatory bodies such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), General Medical Council (GMC) and Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), each of which has introduced frameworks and guidance to support and professionalise the role of clinical educators. MHPE programmes typically serve as an entry point for healthcare professionals seeking to take on more formal educational roles at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels. These programmes provide comprehensive theoretical and practical grounding in curriculum design, teaching and assessment methodologies, leadership, management and educational research. Approximately 68% of MHPE programmes require a capstone project or master's dissertation, reflecting their emphasis on scholarly inquiry and evidence-based education 1-3. As of 2021, an estimated 145 MHPE programmes operate globally 2. While their impact is increasingly recognised, a recent review in this journal 4 identifies a persistent gap in opportunities for graduates and current learners to build professional networks. Strengthening such connections is essential to maximising the long-term impact of MHPE training. Without supportive structures, the field risks perpetuating a ‘leaking pipeline’, whereby motivated educators divert into other clinical pathways, unable to realise their potential as future leaders and innovators in healthcare education. The Clinical Education National Network (CENN) was developed in direct response to this need. Leaders in postgraduate healthcare education identified limited opportunities for learners and educators to connect, share and develop. The Network provides a structured forum for MHPE learners and graduates to present research, engage in scholarly dialogue and establish collaborations. By fostering a sense of community, it helps ensure that investment in educational expertise is sustained, and that graduates are supported to become future leaders in healthcare education. Building on this foundational rationale, the CENN National Symposium 2025 convened researchers, clinicians and postgraduate students from across the United Kingdom to address the recognised need for a national forum focused on health professions education research. The event aimed to provide an inclusive platform for emerging and established scholars to present work, engage in critical dialogue and develop collaborative networks. While attendees described the symposium as ‘a delightful …’ and ‘a fun …’ day, these sentiments were accompanied by substantive reflection on the complexities facing educators and learners in contemporary healthcare systems. The programme spanned technological innovation, neurodiversity and inclusion, clinical preparedness and methodological development—key areas shaping the current and future landscape of health professions education. Here, we reflect on the day, exploring the presentations and discussions through three overarching themes—‘Technology’, ‘Equity, Diversity and Inclusion’ and ‘The Future of Health Professions Education’—and synthesises key insights from across the programme. Technological innovation featured prominently across the day's presentations, demonstrating how digital tools are reshaping pedagogical practice and offering interventions to enhance learner engagement, experiential depth and competency development. Several talks illustrated this shift within clinical education. The session ‘Virtual Reality Applications in Teaching Empathy to Medical Students’ showed how immersive simulation can strengthen emotional intelligence and reflective capacity by allowing learners to practise complex interpersonal interactions in psychologically safe environments. Further innovation was evident in ‘The GEMstone Maze: Gamification of Medical Skills and Knowledge’. This interactive project used game mechanics to encourage active learning, clinical reasoning and support procedural recall. The positive response from attendees, one noting they ‘loved the Gemstone Maze session’, highlighted the appeal and pedagogical promise of gamified approaches, particularly for learners accustomed to digital interactivity. The presentation ‘Brief E-Learning for Delirium Recognition’ also demonstrated the value of well-designed digital resources in supporting clinical competence. By integrating audiovisual content with structured diagnostic material, the session showed how e-learning can enhance accessibility and accommodate diverse learning preferences, aligning with broader commitments to flexible and inclusive pedagogy. Collectively, the technological contributions emphasised that educational practice must evolve alongside technological advances ensuring learners are fully prepared for the increasingly data-driven and digitally supported contexts in which they will work. EDI constituted one of the most substantive thematic pillars of the symposium, with presentations offering a nuanced and multilayered examination of learner diversity and the structural barriers that continue to influence educational experiences. The first presentation, ‘Experiences of Clinical Skills Educators Working with Students with Specific Learning Difficulties’, foregrounded the realities faced by educators when supporting neurodivergent learners in clinical skills environments. The study highlighted the unevenness with which inclusive practices are implemented and underscored the need for structured, system-wide approaches to supporting learners with specific learning difficulties. These concerns were expanded upon in ‘Supporting Neurodiversity in Surgery: Exploring the Experiences of Dyslexic ENT Trainees and Their Trainers’. Drawing on lived experience and reflexive qualitative analysis, this presentation challenged deficit-oriented views of dyslexia in medical training. Instead, it emphasised the distinctive strengths dyslexic trainees can bring to surgical practice, such as enhanced spatial reasoning and adaptability, while simultaneously outlining the systemic constraints that shape their training. Across the EDI-focused discussions, presenters and participants consistently emphasised the need for universal design principles, early intervention and targeted educator development as essential elements of a contemporary and equitable approach to health professions education. The closing keynote, ‘Journeying Through Health Professions Education Research: Why Does It Matter and Where to Next?’, provided a forward-looking synthesis of the field, emphasising the importance of methodological diversity, theoretical clarity and innovation. The presentation underscored the need for research agendas that extend beyond conventional topics and that engage with global inequities, rural healthcare provision and emerging technologies. This theme of preparedness was further developed in ‘The Prioritisation Problem: Newly Qualified Doctors' Perceptions of Undergraduate Training’. The study revealed tensions between academic training and the demands of real-world clinical prioritisation, contributing to participant reflections that ‘more prep is needed for clinical prioritisation for students’. This highlighted an urgent need to re-examine both the content and the sequencing of undergraduate curricula to ensure alignment with workplace realities. The session ‘Justification and Clarification of Applying the EPA Model’ complemented this forward-looking perspective by illustrating how Entrustable Professional Activities can be used to create structured, competency-based approaches to procedural training. The presentation demonstrated how EPAs can help bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and clinical readiness, promoting both learner autonomy and patient safety. Despite enthusiasm for innovation, the symposium highlighted areas where technological preparedness remains insufficient. Participant reflections indicated concern regarding the delivery of training on clinical prioritisation, with one attendee noting that ‘more prep is needed for clinical prioritisation …’. Such feedback underscores the need for curricula to equip learners not only with practical skills but also with the analytical competencies required in modern healthcare. The discussions stimulated by these sessions resonated deeply with attendees. One participant commented that they had ‘taken lots of notes … thinking of all the work being done to support that agenda’. This feedback reflected a broader recognition that inclusive education cannot rely on isolated acts of good practice but must be embedded as a core institutional commitment. Professional development for emerging researchers was also addressed. The session on ‘How to Get Your Masters Work Published’ provided clear guidance on navigating the publication process, prompting one attendee to remark on the ‘useful tips on how to publish’. This practical support aligns with the symposium's overarching mission to nurture postgraduate researchers and strengthen scholarly capacity. The CENN National Symposium 2025 offered a substantial and timely contribution to the national conversation on health professions education. By integrating discussions of technological innovation, inclusive pedagogy and future-oriented research agendas, the event successfully established itself as a significant platform for early-career postgraduate (PGT) learners, researchers and experienced educators alike. Participant reflections such as ‘… a great conference’ and ‘many thanks for the talks’ reflect both the quality of the programme and the value of creating dedicated spaces for scholarly exchange. As health professions education evolves amid contemporary pressures, this symposium has laid vital groundwork for continued collaboration, critical reflection and reform—momentum we look forward to advancing and expanding at next year's event. Barbara Macpherson: writing – original draft preparation (equal); writing – review and editing (equal). Keely Kulesza-Smith: writing – original draft preparation (equal); writing – review and editing (equal). Benjamin Eckles: writing – original draft preparation (equal); writing – review and editing (equal). Ana Da Silva: writing – original draft preparation (equal); writing – review and editing (equal). The authors have nothing to report. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
Macpherson et al. (Mon,) studied this question.