Clinical 1: Suspected sepsis in adults
Recognising suspected sepsis, evaluating risk, escalating care and applying current NICE guidance in adults aged 16 or over.
Browse and learn
Only reviewed and published learning is listed publicly.
Recognising suspected sepsis, evaluating risk, escalating care and applying current NICE guidance in adults aged 16 or over.
Recognition, assessment, prevention and management of delirium in hospital and long-term care, with particular attention to hypoactive delirium.
Identifying people approaching the end of life, planning ahead, communicating uncertainty and applying NICE guidance for the last days of life.
Identify leadership in ordinary clinical work without confusing informal influence with formal authority.
Professional leadership is not confined to office-holders. This module connects everyday medical professionalism with teamwork, fairness, delegation, resources, governance and accountable leadership.
Bring patient purpose, changing team membership and communication together so that shared understanding produces coordinated action rather than parallel conversations.
Lead responsibly in a digital and AI-mediated NHS, plan the first 90 days of formal authority, build an evidence-based leadership portfolio and leave sustainable work behind.
Turn governance from a meeting structure into a practical method for recognising risk, escalating concerns, learning from incidents and demonstrating assurance.
Use Good medical practice as a practical framework for competence, respect, teamwork, honesty, raising concerns and sustainable professional behaviour.
Recognise SAS as a substantive and diverse career, separate recognition from progression, and turn a broad concern into a decision that can be answered.
Compare an SAS offer or changed post systematically, separating appointment, employment, immigration, indemnity and practical onboarding questions.
Practical recognition, risk assessment, investigation and early management of acute kidney injury using NICE NG148.
Applying NICE NG249 to falls assessment and prevention in older people and adults aged 50 to 64 at higher risk.
Practical VTE risk assessment, hospital prophylaxis principles, and NICE diagnostic pathways for suspected DVT and pulmonary embolism.
Detection of atrial fibrillation, stroke and bleeding risk assessment, anticoagulation principles and review using NICE NG196.
Accurate diagnosis, cardiovascular risk assessment, postural blood pressure, treatment principles and review using NICE NG136.
Individualised goals, cardiovascular and renal risk, medicines review and the 2026 NICE NG28 framework for adults with type 2 diabetes.
Person-centred review of multimorbidity, treatment burden and polypharmacy using NICE NG56.
Define CGA as a multidimensional, multidisciplinary and iterative clinical process. Distinguish CGA from a clerking template, screening tool or one-off assessment.
Identify clinical patterns that should prompt consideration of CGA. Use frailty, multimorbidity, geriatric syndromes and functional change as triggers rather than rigid eligibility rules.
Build a problem list that integrates acute illness, chronic disease and geriatric syndromes. Distinguish diagnosis from impact on function and goals.
Perform a structured medicines review within CGA. Identify indication, benefit, harm, adherence, monitoring and treatment burden.
Differentiate delirium, dementia, depression and other cognitive/psychological problems. Use baseline cognition and collateral history appropriately.
Assess ADLs, IADLs, mobility, gait, balance and rehabilitation potential. Use current falls guidance to structure multifactorial assessment.
Identify undernutrition risk, swallowing issues, dehydration and oral-health contributors. Assess continence, pain, vision and hearing as functional determinants.
Assess social support, carer capacity, isolation, finance and safeguarding concerns. Assess the home environment, accessibility, equipment and community services.
Elicit what matters to the person and convert it into meaningful goals. Incorporate advance care planning, treatment preferences and future wishes appropriately.
Convert multidomain information into a prioritised problem list. Assign actions, ownership, timescales and review points.
Build the five-layer model for confidentiality decisions and distinguish professional duties, common law, data-protection law, statutory authority and organisational governance.
Recognise confidential information across records, conversations, images and digital systems, and understand access, anonymisation, pseudonymisation and confidentiality after death.
Separate treatment consent, confidentiality consent and data-protection lawful basis, and apply proportionate information sharing for direct care, families and multidisciplinary teams.
Apply the current UK data-protection framework after the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, including lawful bases, special-category data, purpose limitation, access and rectification.
Use proportional, documented reasoning when confidentiality may need to be breached to protect patients or others, including safeguarding and serious-harm scenarios.
Distinguish a request from a legal duty, verify authority, limit disclosure and manage police, court, regulator, employer, insurer and solicitor requests safely.
Apply confidentiality principles where decision-making authority is complex: children and young people, adults lacking capacity, proxies, relatives and deceased patients.
Manage accurate clinical records across creation, access, correction, retention, subject access and secure disposal while preserving historical integrity.
Apply confidentiality and data-protection principles to email, messaging, photographs, recordings, remote care, cloud platforms and AI without relying on product-specific rules.
Recognise and respond to information incidents, preserve evidence, escalate promptly, support breach assessment and integrate the whole programme through complex scenarios.
Consent is the patient's permission for a proposed examination, investigation, treatment or other intervention. In good practice it is reached through a decision-making process in which the clinician and patient exchange information, identify what matters to the patient and reach a shared understanding of the available choices. The GMC describes shared...
Materiality cannot be reduced to a standard complication list. The clinician needs to understand the outcomes that matter to the individual, because a low-frequency harm may be decisive for one person and less important to another. This is the practical legacy of Montgomery and is mirrored in GMC guidance requiring clinicians to explore a patient's...
A patient cannot make a meaningful healthcare decision if information is inaccessible or if they cannot express their preferences. Communication support is therefore part of valid decision-making, not an optional courtesy. The clinician should actively identify barriers and adapt the process rather than interpreting difficulty as incapacity. Barriers may...
Consent requires a person who can make the relevant decision, but disagreement with clinicians is not evidence of incapacity. The consent clinician should notice when capacity is genuinely in doubt, support the person to decide, and then use the applicable decision-specific framework. The full methodology belongs in the ClinicalEdu Mental Capacity...
An emergency can compress the time available for discussion, but it does not abolish respect for autonomy. A conscious patient who can make the decision should still be involved. Focus the discussion on the immediate decision, the most important benefits and harms, realistic alternatives and what may happen without treatment. Royal College of...
Children and young people should be involved in decisions about their care as much as they are able. The first clinical task is therefore not to ask only who can sign, but to explain the decision in a developmentally appropriate way, hear the young person's views and identify what they understand and want. Assent is a useful educational term for a...
An adult who can make the relevant decision can refuse recommended treatment, including treatment that clinicians believe is life-saving. The response is not to raise the capacity threshold because the consequences are serious. Instead, ensure the patient has the information they need, check understanding and voluntariness, address communication...
A procedure may generate more paperwork, but the underlying standard is unchanged: the patient needs an opportunity to understand the proposed intervention, the material risks and benefits, reasonable alternatives and what may happen without it. The depth of the discussion should reflect complexity, uncertainty and the patient's priorities. The clinician...
Consent is often built across several contacts: a specialist recommends treatment, a nurse provides education, a pharmacist discusses medicines, and another clinician performs the procedure. This can be good care, but only if roles are clear and the patient receives a coherent decision process. A dangerous team assumption is 'someone else must have done...
A useful consent record identifies the decision being made, the relevant options and material information discussed, patient-specific concerns or priorities, questions raised, the outcome and any need for review. Capacity, communication support, voluntariness or legal authority should be recorded when they are relevant to the decision. The note should be...
Palliative care should be understood as an active approach to improving quality of life and reducing suffering for people living with serious or life-shortening conditions. It is not a declaration that disease-directed treatment has ended. Scottish national strategy now explicitly describes palliative care as helping people live as well as possible with...
NICE NG142 recommends systems to identify adults who may be approaching the end of life so that planning, support and coordination can begin. Identification may be prompted by progressive functional decline, increasing frailty, recurrent unplanned admissions, escalating symptom burden, weight loss or reduced intake, disease-specific deterioration, or...
Advance or future care planning is a voluntary process of thinking and talking about what matters now and what may matter if health changes. NHS England Universal Principles, NHS Wales Future Care Planning and Northern Ireland's policy all emphasise person-centred reflection rather than form completion. The terminology differs, but the underlying aim is...
Serious illness can impair decision-making temporarily through delirium, fatigue, breathlessness, pain, medication effects or communication difficulty. Before concluding that a person cannot decide, clinicians should take practicable steps to support participation where time allows: treat reversible distress, choose a better time, simplify information,...
Goals-of-care discussions should connect the person's priorities with what medicine can realistically achieve. The conversation asks which outcomes matter, what burdens are acceptable, which treatments are clinically appropriate and what should happen in an emergency. The product should be a positive care plan, not only a list of interventions that will...
Anticipatory medicines are prescribed in advance so that symptoms can be treated promptly if they arise, particularly when access to prescribing may be difficult out of hours. NICE recommends an individualised approach, with clear indications and routes, and requires assessment before administration. The presence of a 'just in case' medicine does not...
Reduced appetite and fluid intake are common as dying approaches. This does not remove the duty to offer assistance with eating and drinking where wanted and appropriate. NICE recommends supporting a dying person to drink if they wish and are able, checking swallowing safety, providing frequent mouth and lip care, and helping with sips where appropriate....
The central lesson from NICE NG31 is individualisation. Once a person may be entering the last days of life, the team should communicate the uncertainty, identify what matters, assess symptoms and hydration, review medicines and interventions, and keep the plan under active review. A standard form can improve reliability, but it must not replace clinical...
Statements such as 'I cannot go on' or 'I want this to end' can mean many different things: uncontrolled pain, fear of future dependency, depression, existential distress, a wish to stop burdensome treatment, a capacitous refusal, or a request for help to end life. The first clinical duty is to listen and clarify rather than label the request...
The moment of death changes the clinical task but does not end professional responsibility. Immediate care includes dignity and privacy, respectful care of the body, support for family and others present, attention to religious or cultural wishes where possible, safe management of devices and property, and clear explanation of what will happen next....
What prescribing is; independent/supplementary models; competence; accountability; deciding not to prescribe.
History, examination principles, red flags, investigations, differential diagnosis, uncertainty and escalation.
Mechanisms, dose-response, therapeutic index, adverse effects, tolerance/dependence and class reasoning.
ADME, half-life, steady state, dose adjustment, age/frailty/genetics/physiology.
Prescription components, numeracy, formulations/routes, BNF/formularies, evidence and decision support.
Drug interactions, allergies, high-risk medicines, monitoring and escalation.
Reconciliation, structured review, burden, adherence, deprescribing and shared decisions.
Renal/hepatic impairment, frailty, pregnancy/breastfeeding, children, weight, multimorbidity and route issues.
Baseline/follow-up monitoring, ADRs, Yellow Card, toxicity, safety-netting and incident learning.
Diagnosis, microbiology, local guidance, spectrum, dose/duration, review/de-escalation and resistance.
Consent, capacity, communication, adherence, remote prescribing, self/family prescribing and complex judgement.
Professional standards, documentation, scope, legal/employer governance, incidents, portfolios and next steps.
Current GPhC architecture, 2026 transition, legacy routes, accountability and multidisciplinary prescribing.
NMC categories, independent/supplementary/community prescribing, annotation, prescribing vs PGD/supply/administration.
Readiness, assessment/diagnostic capability, pharmacology/numeracy, AEI selection, supervised practice and portfolio.
Approved routes where required, assessment/diagnostic development, supervised practice and evidence.
Annotation, employer governance, scope, controlled drugs, supervision, revalidation/CPD and Wales assurance.
Employer governance, service scope, controlled drugs, remote prescribing, supervision and maintaining competence.
Define frailty as a state of reduced reserve and increased vulnerability rather than as chronological age. Distinguish frailty from disability, multimorbidity, sarcopenia and ordinary ageing.
Recognise common frailty syndromes and atypical presentations. Use baseline function and trajectory to distinguish chronic vulnerability from acute deterioration.
Differentiate population case-finding, diagnostic confirmation, bedside judgement, physical performance and multidomain assessment. Explain the appropriate role and limitations of the eFI.
Describe the intended role of the CFS as a judgement-based summary of overall fitness/frailty. Explain why the current official tool and training resources should control scoring practice.
Understand that adjacent CFS levels reflect meaningful differences in usual function and dependence. Use change in instrumental and personal activities to structure a judgement.
Anchor CFS scoring to the appropriate pre-acute baseline. Take a structured functional history that supports scoring.
Apply CFS reasoning to realistic cases with incomplete or conflicting information. Identify what additional information is needed before scoring.
Translate frailty recognition into an individualised management plan. Prioritise reversible contributors, function, medicines, nutrition, mobility and patient goals.
Describe core principles of effective frailty pathways across acute, community and care-home settings. Distinguish evidence-based service principles from locally variable operating models.
Use frailty as one component of complex clinical decision-making rather than a deterministic rule. Integrate reversibility, treatment burden, patient goals, function and prognosis.
How should a doctor interpret Good medical practice in real work, and how do GMC standards relate to law, local policy, revalidation and fitness-to-practise processes? Conceptual foundation. This module does not teach the detail of every later duty; it teaches how to reason with professional standards and identify the source of an obligation.
What does professional competence require across clinical and non-clinical work, and how should doctors respond when task, supervision, evidence, consultation mode or resources exceed safe limits? Focus on competence and safe clinical reasoning. Detailed consent, prescribing and capacity rules are cross-linked rather than duplicated.
How do continuing development, quality improvement, feedback, reflection, appraisal and revalidation fit together without becoming a portfolio-compliance exercise? Explains the professional and regulatory architecture; a later Appraisal/Revalidation programme will teach detailed portfolio construction.
How should doctors translate dignity, fairness, communication and patient partnership into everyday clinical behaviour, and where do consent, capacity, confidentiality and equality law add further requirements? Provides the Domain 2 professional framework and signposts the existing Consent/Mental Capacity programmes and future Confidentiality course for deeper legal mechanics.
What professional duties arise when a patient is vulnerable, urgent care is needed, harm has occurred or a complaint is made, and how do professional candour and organisational duties interact? Focuses on professional response and system interfaces. Safeguarding law and end-of-life decision-making are signposted rather than exhaustively taught.
How does GMP translate culture, respect, discrimination, leadership, supervision and support into individual professional duties at every level of seniority? Teaches professional behaviours and interfaces with equality/employment law. A later Leadership programme will go deeper into organisational design and leadership methods.
How should responsibility and information move safely across people, professions, organisations and time, and what remains with the doctor when work is delegated or referred? Focuses on continuity and distributed responsibility; detailed records/confidentiality and specialty handover protocols remain local or course-specific.
What should doctors do when patient safety is compromised by systems, colleagues or their own health, and how do professional duties interact with whistleblowing, governance and reasonable-adjustment frameworks? Focuses on recognition, escalation and support. It does not give case-specific employment-law advice or replace occupational-health assessment.
What does professional integrity require when money, relationships, personal beliefs, reputation or other interests could influence medical judgement? Deep treatment of probity/integrity and conflicts. Detailed confidentiality, research governance and employment investigation procedures remain outside scope.
How should doctors communicate and cooperate when professional statements may influence patients, the public, employers, regulators or courts, and how can the four GMP domains be integrated in complex cases? Integrative final module. It teaches principles of professional communication and legal/regulatory cooperation, not advocacy strategy or detailed litigation procedure.
Examine how contribution can grow without recognition, authority or opportunity growing with it, and how organisations can respond without substituting labels for evidence.
Use formal authority carefully during transition into a consultant role, drawing on existing service knowledge rather than assuming title equals organisational fluency.
Move from intention to observable effect: seek feedback, identify patterns in your behaviour and distinguish activity from impact.
Choose leadership methods for context rather than treating style as identity; recognise formal power, informal credibility, hierarchy and the limits of influence without authority.
Structure decisions under uncertainty by clarifying purpose, risk, authority, assumptions, options, dissent and the point at which a decision must be revisited.
Understand how small repeated behaviours create culture; conduct difficult conversations proportionately and use feedback, coaching, mentoring and supervision for development.
Delegate without abandoning accountability, create escalation routes, respond to safety information and receive concerns without punishing the messenger.
Connect improvement with implementation, resource choices, meetings, organisational politics, fair opportunity, strategy and cross-boundary working.
Build a rights-based, decision-specific approach to mental capacity and avoid assumptions based on age, diagnosis, disability or disagreement.
Use practical communication, timing and environmental adjustments to maximise a person’s ability to participate before concluding that they cannot decide.
Recognise when a formal capacity assessment is proportionate, and avoid using capacity assessment simply because a person refuses, disagrees or lives with a particular diagnosis.
Apply a structured, decision-specific assessment that identifies relevant information, tests the required functional abilities and records the reasoning rather than relying on a checklist or cognitive score.
Recognise fluctuating or complex decision-making ability and adapt timing, reassessment and multidisciplinary support to the person’s clinical state and the urgency of the decision.
Use the correct jurisdiction-specific substitute-decision framework, involve the person as far as possible and distinguish consultation from legal authority.
Verify whether another person has lawful decision-making authority, understand its scope and limits, and avoid the unsafe assumption that “next of kin” can consent for an adult.
Distinguish legally binding advance refusals from broader statements and clinical plans, and check validity, applicability and jurisdiction before relying on a future decision-making document.
Understand the distinction between restriction, restraint and deprivation of liberty, and apply the current post-June-2026 multifactorial Article 5 approach rather than outdated shorthand.
Create records that show the decision-making pathway, transfer essential information safely and escalate unresolved disagreement through proportionate clinical, safeguarding, ethics or legal routes.
Build a deliberate career plan across clinical expertise, Specialist roles, leadership, education, Portfolio Pathway and later-career choices.
Prepare for annual appraisal and revalidation by maintaining a proportionate whole-practice portfolio built around reflection, improvement and credible evidence.
Apply confidentiality and professional standards to email, messaging, electronic records, online tools, social media and emerging AI-enabled workflows.
Strengthen patient and colleague communication by making decisions, uncertainty, risk, expectations and escalation explicit.
Learn to separate the labels attached to a doctor from the evidence of what the doctor is appointed, authorised and competent to do.
Use a four-nation source map to identify which employment, appraisal, progression and pension arrangements apply before relying on apparently similar guidance.
Understand how national terms, individual contractual documents and local policies fit together, and what to do when the records appear inconsistent.
Use job planning as the operating agreement connecting duties, time, objectives, resources and review rather than as a static timetable.
Identify recurring clinical, administrative, educational and governance work that has become invisible and prepare proportionate evidence for review.
Separate pay progression, additional work, contractual disagreement and formal appeal routes so that each question is taken to the right process.
Recognise mismatches between role, competence, workload and resources; address immediate safety first and record unresolved organisational dependencies.
Prepare for appraisal as a reflective professional process, selecting proportionate evidence from the whole scope of practice and turning discussion into useful objectives.
Distinguish appraisal from revalidation and understand the roles of the doctor, appraiser, responsible officer or suitable person and GMC.
Build a purposeful professional portfolio in which evidence is indexed to a claim or decision rather than accumulated without a defined use.
Respond proportionately to feedback, concerns and formal processes while distinguishing learning, employment, regulatory and legal routes and protecting deadlines.
Define the intended destination before building evidence, then identify the criteria, gaps, opportunities and decision-makers relevant to that route.
Understand the Wales Specialist regrading route as a specific national process requiring evidence against the applicable criteria rather than seniority alone.
Understand the Scotland Specialist regrading route and keep its national policy, evidence requirements and decision process distinct from other UK routes.
Prepare for competitive Specialist appointments in England and Northern Ireland by matching evidence to the post and person specification rather than assuming automatic progression.
Approach the GMC Portfolio Pathway as a regulatory application with specialty-specific evidence requirements, not as an employment regrading exercise.
Make leadership, education and supervision work visible by defining purpose, authority, time, deliverables and evidence of effect.
Recognise workplace dignity and speaking-up issues, distinguish support from formal process, and seek timely help where safety, discrimination or employment consequences may arise.
Understand the main NHS pension questions that interact with SAS career decisions and prepare accurate records and questions for scheme administrators or individual advisers.
Plan later-career transitions and succession by connecting professional responsibilities, workload, pension choices, knowledge transfer and sustainable practice.
