When I helped out with interviews, we used to base some of the interview on the PS. So I have read a lot of real PSs.
I can't recall a Tragedy Tale feel in the format. We tended to have 3 main types of applicants for medicine (many people were mixed types, too): 1. someone who had personal experience of seeing the system at work as a patient or as relative of a patient and wants to help others in similar way; 2. kids whose parents were health professionals and identify with that role; 3. scientists who like people or people people who like science, and want a nice blend of both aspects. Always Liberally interlaced with factual bragging about other life achievements. So their format was "why do I want to study medicine, how I learned more about medicine, why it's a good student life & career fit for me, and by the way I'm amazing at all this other stuff, too." That must be basic format for most PSs, for all subjects?
I find the references awful, I'd rather read a hundred curated PSs than 2 references. Most references are not actually personal and just restated the info we got from exam record or in student's PS , the ones that are personal stand out hugely. That's not fair, that only a few students get really personal references.
Work experience OTOH: we liked to see some evidence of resilience in those statements. We'd ask questions about resilience anyway, though.
We don't trust the PS to tell us anything accurate & truthful. PSs are too curated. But they are more interesting than the references, at last.