by Nathania Bestwick NIHR Newcastle PSRC PhD student
I was grateful to travel to London for the PSYCH Symposium 2025 on Thursday, 4th December. This symposium brings together researchers, therapists, doctors, policymakers, investors, and campaigners to talk about the latest research in psychedelic medicine and how psychedelic therapies may be used in mainstream healthcare to treat mental health conditions.
I attended the symposium with Radin Karimi, another PhD student from the NIHR Newcastle Patient Safety Research Collaboration (PSRC). Like my own work, Radin’s research looks at how to better manage polypharmacy (which is when people take many different medicines at the same time). Medicines used to treat mental health conditions often add to this problem, so we were interested to find out if psychedelic therapies might help people manage their mental health so they can take fewer medicines. We were also keen to learn how patient safety is managed in this developing area of research.
The symposium focused on a range of conditions, including depression, anxiety, PTSD, addiction, eating disorders and distress near the end of life, particularly for people who have not responded to more commonly used treatments. Speakers shared evidence showing that psychedelic medicine, such as psilocybin, MDMA and ibogaine, can help to ease symptoms in people with these conditions. They also explained that psychedelic therapies may help people process deeper emotional problems behind their symptoms, which can lead to longer-lasting improvements in well-being. Several speakers had worked with military veterans and shared how these therapies have helped them manage PTSD, support their mental health, and feel better in everyday life after leaving the military.
Patient safety was a major focus throughout the symposium. Research in this area is strictly regulated, with people being carefully checked (called screening) before they’re invited to take part, and with study information being clearly explained so that people can make an informed choice when agreeing to join a study. Therapies are provided in carefully controlled and supportive treatment spaces by highly trained therapists and healthcare professionals, with close monitoring during sessions, and follow-up support after the treatment to help people understand their experiences and get the best results from the treatment.
Professors David Nutt and Guy Goodwin had an interesting discussion about recent results from a large study which showed that a single dose of synthetic psilocybin helped people with severe, long-lasting depression, with higher doses leading to bigger improvements in symptoms. They also spoke about drug laws creating stigma around psychedelic research, even though there is growing evidence that these substances can have real health benefits and that they may be less harmful than legal drugs, such as alcohol and tobacco.
One example of how psychedelic medicine is being used in standard healthcare came from Professor Ranil Gunewardene, who described how he is leading one of the first clinics in Australia to offer regulated psychedelic-assisted therapy. Since his research is with patients who have complex health conditions (called real-world patients), it may give us helpful insight into how these therapies can be used outside of highly controlled research environments.
In summary, the symposium showed that psychedelic medicine has promising potential to improve care for people with mental health conditions, particularly those that are difficult to treat. It also highlighted that more research is needed and that building upon the current evidence base will help us better understand how effective and safe these treatments are, and how they can be carefully and appropriately used as part of standard healthcare.
Details and bios for each of the speakers can be found here
By PhD Student Jess McCann
For our October EDI event we welcomed Steve Storey, lead clinical pharmacist at Cumbria, Northumberland, Tyne & Wear (CNTW) NHS Trust, to come and speak to us about how we can make ‘Reasonable Adjustments to create Inclusive Consultations for Patients’.
Reasonable adjustments are described as small, sensible changes made so that people who face barriers to accessing and receiving care, due to a disability, mental health condition or other additional needs, are given equal opportunities.
He explained that we accept reasonable adjustments (like physical ramps, interpreters and assistive technology) in many areas of day-to-day life, so why should healthcare consultations be any different? Within healthcare settings, failing to make such adjustments could worsen existing inequities. For instance, people with un‐met communication, sensory or cognitive needs may experience worse outcomes, including higher mortality, simply because the system assumed a “one size fits all” approach.
In Steve’s session, he spoke of examples of what counts as “reasonable” vs. “unreasonable” adjustments. Sometimes, it isn’t about removing all risk or achieving perfect equality in consultation duration and structure, but about taking practicable, proportionate and effective steps to address disadvantages for that person, at that time. He then moved into an interactive exercise with the audience to experience some of the disadvantages people may face. He asked us to solve a complex mental‐math calculation within 30 seconds; then to try reading some text in a different language; then to try reading very small, blurry text. These simple activities illustrated how patients with cognitive impairment, language barriers, sensory loss or low health literacy are at a disadvantage when seeking, accessing or receiving health care. It was eye-opening to experience the frustration, the delay and confusion that patients are subject to.
Steve discussed several barriers for patients accessing care, such as language and language style, communication that isn’t just about language (e.g., neurodiversity, sensory needs, memory, processing speed), physical disability, diagnostic overshadowing and hypersensitivity (e.g., to sensory stimuli, environments, noise, smells). These may mean that reasonable adjustments to consultations are used; for example, longer appointment times, quieter environments, visual prompts, alternative formats, consultation breaks or bringing a support person to accompany.
Steve shared with us some very impactful real-life examples of people he has provided care for who have required reasonable adjustments, and demonstrated what it means to go the extra mile in delivering person-centred care.
He summarised that reasonable adjustments are not something necessarily taught within university or professional training but are central within professional capability. Being aware of additional needs, asking patients what they would prefer and anticipating barriers and how to act on them allows us to demonstrate humility and advocate for the best possible outcomes for our patients.
It was a very stimulating and thought-provoking session, and it was great to see a big audience of attendees, spanning undergraduate Pharmacy students, postgraduate students, members of the NIHR Newcastle PSRC, wider University network and clinical colleagues from Newcastle upon Tyne Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. The talk provided valuable insights that we can apply not only in our current roles but also take with us throughout our future careers. Engaging with reasonable adjustments in consultation settings may allow us to be better equipped to promote person-centred care to diverse, underrepresented patient groups.
Thank you, Steve!
By Hiranmayi Madabhushi Hari, Research Assistant (School of Pharmacy)
Equity cannot exist without disability inclusion. This month, as we mark UK Disability History Month, I want to pause and reflect on what inclusion really means, beyond statements, beyond awareness posts and beyond checkboxes on institutional forms.
Disability is not a niche issue. It is a public health issue.
It is a human rights issue.
It is a societal responsibility.
Disability history reminds us that progress did not happen by accident. It came from disabled activists demanding better-from accessible transport to inclusive education, to rights-based healthcare. Their work continues today, and we owe it to them to keep pushing.
Across the world, disabled people continue to face overlapping barriers such as inaccessible healthcare, limited education and employment opportunities and stigma that is often disabling than the condition itself. Out of the barriers they face, the most difficult one which sits uncomfortably at the intersection of public health, ethics and disability rights is the emergence of measures that subtly suggest a final option when what is most urgently needed is meaningful prioritisation, adequate resourcing, and sustained approaches that uphold the value of their lives.
True accessibility is not an afterthought. It is a starting point. It asks us to design spaces, policies and services that recognise disability as a natural part of human diversity, not an exception or burden to accommodate. The answer to our questions must always be better care.
This month, I hope we move from awareness to action.
From support to taking accountability.
From Inclusion to redesign.
Because a society that works for disabled people works better for everyone.
To all disabled students, staff, parents, carers and community members- your presence strengthens the world, your voices reshape our understanding, and your contributions enrich our collective future.
Let’s honour Disability History Month not just by remembering the past, but by reshaping the future together.
By PhD Student Liyuan Zhu
On 17th October 2025, I was very excited to present my research poster at the NIHR SafetyNet Symposium in Manchester. SafetyNet is a group of six NIHR Patient Safety Research Collaborations (PSRCs) across England. This year’s event had a special theme: “Tackling Inequities in Patient Safety.” It was the first time to bring together researchers, doctors, and patient representatives from across the country to share ideas and thoughts.
The symposium included inspiring talks, research showcases, discussions, and poster sessions. I was especially interested in two keynote talks, one about moving away from a “blame culture” in healthcare, and another about ethnic inequalities in patient safety.
I also learned about many areas I had never thought deeply about before, such as healthcare harms in prisons, inequality in perioperative and respiratory care, and access to medicines for people experiencing homelessness.
These sessions made me realise that inequality in health is a very complex issue. It is shaped by factors like race, social background, environment, and language, and also by how society responds to unfairness itself. These issues are linked together, often trapping those already at a disadvantage. To change this, what we can do is to build a strong “safety net” that supports everyone, especially people who are underrepresented or face extra barriers.
My poster was titled “Predicting Diabetic Eye Disease with AI: Trajectory Embedding and Causal Exploration of Statin Effects.” In simple terms, my study looked at how artificial intelligence (AI) can help predict who might develop diabetic eye disease, a leading cause of sight loss in people with diabetes. I also explored whether statins, common cholesterol-lowering medicines, can help reduce this risk. In addition, we found that there are inequalities between males and females, and among diabetes types. These results suggest that healthcare can be more personalised and fairer for each person.
Attending this symposium was a great experience. I met many passionate researchers who share the same goal: to make healthcare safer and more equal. It reminded me that technology like AI should not only make predictions but also help reduce health inequalities and improve care for everyone.
By Kamil, NIHR Newcastle PSRC Patient, Public Contributor
Lured by the promise of good food and new acquaintances, on Friday 17 October I made my way to Manchester for the NIHR SafetyNet Symposium – a gathering of clinicians, researchers and public contributors united by a single mission: tackling inequities in patient safety. Hosted by the Greater Manchester Patient Safety Research Collaboration (PSRC), the event brought together colleagues from the six PSRCs across England – Central London, Greater Manchester, Midlands, Newcastle, North West London and Yorkshire & Humber.
The day began with coffee and a bustling lobby filled with poster presentations. From the start, it was clear this wasn’t just an academic exercise. It was a collective effort to bridge the gap between policy, practice and lived experience.
One of the first things that struck me was the keynote by Dr Rosie Benneyworth from the Health Services Safety Investigations Body (HSSIB). I hadn’t heard of HSSIB before and I found its mission fascinating. The organisation investigates systemic issues in healthcare topics such as sepsis, prison health and fatigue without focusing on blame. Instead, it looks for learning and improvement. This shift from a ‘who’s to blame’ culture to one of collective accountability resonated deeply with me.
A presentation on avoidable healthcare-associated harm in prisons was another eye-opener. While I wasn’t surprised to hear that prisoners and people experiencing homelessness suffer significantly worse health outcomes, it was sobering to see how these inequities manifest in daily practice e.g. medication shortages, missed appointments and institutional barriers that make basic care difficult. As someone finishing reading a book on health promotion, I could connect the dots between theory and reality: these are not abstract inequalities, they are lived injustices.
One reflection that stayed with me came from a discussion about adoption and breaking cycles of poverty and violence. Even in systems that often feel broken, there are ways to create safety and opportunity through compassion and action.
Several sessions focused on the intersection of communication and safety, including translation and interpreting services. This hit particularly close to home. As a qualified Polish interpreter, I know how vital accurate translation is for patient safety, yet the pay rates offered by NHS providers are often so low that professionals can’t afford to take the work. Hearing that language access was being discussed as a safety issue, not just a convenience, was both encouraging and frustrating. We have the knowledge; now the system needs the will to act.
The Patient Safety Healthcare Inequalities Reduction Framework, presented by Dr Hester Wain, outlined five principles for change: communication and information, training and resources, data, co-production, and research. I was especially struck by her emphasis that the experiences informing the framework are what make it powerful.
By the end of the day, after many conversations in the poster corridor and a moving talk on ethnic inequities in patient safety by Professor Dawn Edge, I left Manchester feeling both hopeful and challenged. The message was clear: health doesn’t happen in a vacuum. Tackling inequity requires empathy, collaboration, and, above all, a commitment to listen to those whose voices are too often ignored. For me, as a patient-cum-public contributor, the symposium was a reminder that my lived experience isn’t just welcome in research – it’s essential.
By Dr Anna Robinson-Barella and Dr Matt Cooper
Along with several of our NIHR Newcastle PSRC colleagues, Matt and I attended the SafetyNet symposium on Friday 17th October in Manchester. The focus of the event was: “Tackling Inequalities in Patient Safety”. It was a day that encouraged a lot of reflection-primarily upon patient safety and our cross-PSRC SafetyNet-agenda, but also upon intersectional influences including ethnicity, marginalisation, and wider EDI-related issues underpinning our work.
We heard from speakers across all six of the PSRCs, as well as two keynote speakers, Dr Rosie Benneyworth presenting “Moving away from a “whose to blame” culture” and Prof Dawn Edge presenting “Ethnic Inequalities in Patient Safety”.
NIHR Newcastle PSRC had 32 of our colleagues in attendance; many of whom presented research posters about their work covering topics like polypharmacy, medicines adherence, costs and treatment decisions, social prescribing, health-related quality of life, and predicting diseases by using AI.
It was also a pleasure to personally contribute to the agenda of the day, and represent NIHR Newcastle PSRC, by presenting an evidence synthesis on inequities affecting medicines access for people experiencing homelessness and the subsequent consequences on their (patient) safety.
Congratulations to all the team involved in organising, hosting and running a great symposium!
By Anonymous Public Contributor
I am a public contributor who has been involved for about six years with many interesting research projects.
I volunteered to give my views to researchers, as, at the age of 75, I have experienced many problems relating to health and social issues. I am retired and have more time, which enables me to participate as a public contributor both online and at in-person meetings.
As both a person who suffers from multiple health conditions and a carer for two people who have complicated health problems, I have been able to contribute my opinions and views on different subjects. I hope my contribution has been helpful in shaping the research studies by responding to the questions posed by the researchers.
I think that public involvement is very important in order to give as wide a view as possible in research studies. Opinions from patients and carers from different ethnic, class, disability and cultural backgrounds may raise issues which researchers need to take into account.
For example, having a family member with liver problems, I was able to contribute to research which highlighted the prejudice the public has about liver transplants where the patient has a problem with alcohol. The researcher designed the study so that information which may have been difficult to include was obtained discreetly, as many patients and carers sometimes try to hide the problem.
By including relevant public contributors’ views and stories, such things as living with a colostomy bag or problems experienced with toileting situations are brought to the attention of researchers.
I am pleased that being involved as a public contributor has improved my IT skills and given me more confidence to speak at meetings.
I have seen researchers suddenly become aware at meetings, on hearing answers to their questions of areas of research which they had not previously thought about.
Call to action.
“Make your research results relevant to all by using PPI.”
By Safer Integrated Health and Social Care Environments PhD Student, Lauren Lawson
In August I was lucky enough to have the opportunity to travel to Singapore to attend the BMJ International Forum on Quality and Safety in Healthcare. I presented a poster about a service evaluation I had worked on, led by Dr Matt Cooper, which explored a hospital discharge service providing one-to-one, personalised support for carers of people leaving hospital.
The conference theme, moving together toward sustainable quality, emphasised the importance of collaboration across sectors to achieve lasting improvements in healthcare. Many sessions focused on involving patients and carers as partners in care, by embedding lived experience into service design and evaluation to make change meaningful and sustainable. Other sessions explored how to support population health across the life course, recognising the social factors that shape health and the role of community-based care.
“For me, a key message was that sustainability in healthcare also depends on continuity, where good care extends beyond the hospital to meet people’s needs in the community.”
These messages echoed the key findings from our service evaluation, which highlighted how person-centred, inclusive support can empower carers to support their own wellbeing and the patient during hospital-to-home transitions. Our approach of working with staff and carers to understand the service’s impact reflected the same emphasis on participation and learning that was central to the conference. For me, a key message was that sustainability in healthcare also depends on continuity, where good care extends beyond the hospital to meet people’s needs in the community.
After the conference I got to explore Singapore and think about sustainability in a different way. The contrast between greenery and skyscrapers, the hawker centres blending food from diverse communities together, and the evening light show through the Supertrees were all incredible reminders the benefits of collaborative design.
by Hiranmayi Madabhushi Hari, Research Assistant, working with Dr Anna Robinson-Barella and Prof Andy Husband.
Hiranmayi Madabhushi Hari, one of our Research Assistants working with Dr Anna Robinson-Barella and Prof Andy Husband, recently attended training about D/deaf awareness. In this reflective blog, Hiranmayi shares a call to action for inclusive research approaches for people who are Deaf and/or Hard of Hearing.
Behind every statistic on deafness (1,2) lies a painful truth: people who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing (HoH) continue to be sidelined in healthcare, research, and everyday life. Deafness is a hidden disability, one you cannot always “see”, yet misconceptions endure. Too often, society clings to inappropriate labels like “deaf & mute/dumb” or “hearing impaired”, “handicapped” terms rooted in stigma. The distinctions between Deaf, deaf, Hard of hearing and Deafblind remain poorly understood, while assumptions that cochlear implants or hearing aids “fix” hearing only deepen isoloaton.
Language matters. Labels must respect individual identity, not reinforce exclusion and a lack of awareness can have very real consequences. Many people cannot lipread, nor do they necessarily know British Sign Language (BSL). Without interpreters, functional hearing loops, or accessible systems, they are left excluded from basic services, including healthcare. For many BSL users and D/deaf people, poor mental health outcomes are a direct consequence of systemic barriers, worsened when communication needs are ignored, interpreters are absent, and accessible systems simply don’t exist. The recent Still Ignores: The fight for Accessible Healthcare report (3) describes this neglect as a “damning indictment”: Deaf patients left without understanding diagnoses, unable to contact their GP, and excluded from safe, equitable care.
These failures spill into research, where D/deaf people are often excluded from clinical trials or overlooked in inclusion criteria. D/deaf awareness, culture, and communication must be embedded in both research design and service delivery. As researchers, we must ask ourselves: are our services and research strategies truly accessible? Do we respect preferred communications? Do we prioritise D/deaf culture in research? Change requires not pity but patience, awareness and urgent action.
References:
- Prevalence of British Sign Language [Internet]. RNID. [cited 2025 Sep 17]. Available from: https://rnid.org.uk/get-involved/research-and-policy/facts-and-figures/prevalence-of-british-sign-language/
- GOV.UK [Internet]. [cited 2025 Sep 17]. The British Sign Language (BSL) report 2022. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-british-sign-language-bsl-report-2022/the-british-sign-language-bsl-report-2022
- Still ignored: the fight for accessible healthcare. Available from: https://rnid.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Still-ignored-the-fight-for-accessible-healthcare.pdf
By Safer Integrated Health and Social Care Environments theme Research Assistant, Evgenia Stepanova.
The PreSIDInt study research team recently presented at The Future Is Cultural: Policy, Practice, and Education Congress, held at the Universitat Internacional de Catalunya in Barcelona (15–17 September 2025). Read more about the event here. The conference was well attended, bringing together an international mix of academics, policymakers, practitioners, artists, and community representatives.
Our paper, “Culturally Competent Strategy to Research: Recommendations and Measures to Design, Deliver and Disseminate a Research Study,” was presented in the Audience Analysis and Cultural Participation session, alongside several thought-provoking contributions. These included presentations on festival resilience (Piotr Firych, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poland), festivalization and its links to social change and democracy (Emmanuel Negrier, University of Montpellier, France), students’ cultural practices and emotions (Marine Thebault, Université Côte d’Azur, France), and participatory evaluation within the Stronger Peripheries Project (Elisabete Tomaz, ISCTE, Portugal).
Whilst other presenters examined how culture is embedded in communities and its role in shaping social change, democracy, and territorial identity, our work focused on how culture and cultural identity can be explored within the research process itself. This generated strong interest, with attendees taking photos of the findings and engaging in lively discussion around our interactive online tool. Leaflets featuring artwork illustrating the project’s key findings were also distributed and well received, with many participants taking them on board. These exchanges provided valuable feedback, informed next steps, and strengthened the project’s international visibility as we continue developing the framework into an accessible online resource.
