Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundProfessional identity formation (PIF) in medical students is a multifactorial phenomenon, shaped by ways that clinical and non-clinical experiences, expectations and environmental factors merge with individual values, beliefs and obligations. The relationship between students’ evolving professional identity and self-identity or personhood remains ill-defined, making it challenging for medical schools to support PIF systematically and strategically. Primarily, to capture prevailing literature on PIF in medical school education, and secondarily, to ascertain how PIF influences on medical students may be viewed through the lens of the ring theory of personhood (RToP) and to identify ways that medical schools support PIF.MethodsA systematic scoping review was conducted using the systematic evidence-based approach. Articles published between 1 January 2000 and 1 July 2020 related to PIF in medical students were searched using PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, ERIC and Scopus. Articles of all study designs (quantitative and qualitative), published or translated into English, were included. Concurrent thematic and directed content analyses were used to evaluate the data.ResultsA total of 10443 abstracts were identified, 272 full-text articles evaluated, and 76 articles included. Thematic and directed content analyses revealed similar themes and categories as follows: characteristics of PIF in relation to professionalism, role of socialization in PIF, PIF enablers and barriers, and medical school approaches to supporting PIF.DiscussionPIF involves iterative construction, deconstruction and inculcation of professional beliefs, values and behaviours into a pre-existent identity. Through the lens of RToP, factors were elucidated that promote or hinder students’ identity development on individual, relational or societal levels. If inadequately or inappropriately supported, enabling factors become barriers to PIF. Medical schools employ an all-encompassing approach to support PIF, illuminating the need for distinct and deliberate longitudinal monitoring and mentoring to foster students’ balanced integration of personal and professional identities over time.

Phenomenon Medical Student Portfolios (MSP)s allow medical students to reflect and better appreciate their clinical, research and academic experiences which promotes their individual personal and professional development. However, differences in adoption rate, content design and practice setting create significant variability in their employ. With MSPs increasingly used to evaluate professional competencies and the student's professional identity formation (PIF), this has become an area of concern. Approach We adopt Krishna’s Systematic Evidence-Based Approach to carry out a Systematic Scoping Review (SSR in SEBA) on MSPs. The structured search process of six databases, concurrent use of thematic and content analysis in the Split Approach and comparisons of the themes and categories with the tabulated summaries of included articles in the Jigsaw Perspective and Funnelling Process offers enhanced transparency and reproducibility to this review. Findings The research team retrieved 14501 abstracts, reviewed 779 full-text articles and included 96 articles. Similarities between the themes, categories and tabulated summaries allowed the identification of the following funnelled domains: Purpose of MSPs, Content and structure of MSPs, Strengths and limitations of MSPs, Methods to improve MSPs, and Use of E-portfolios. Insights Variability in the employ of MSPs arise as a result of a failure to recognise its different roles and uses. Here we propose additional roles of MSPs, in particular, building on a consistent set of content materials and assessments of milestones called micro-competencies. Whislt generalised micro-competencies assess achievement of general milestones expected of all medical students, personalised micro-competencies record attainment of particular skills, knowledge and attitudes balanced against the medical student’s abilities, context and needs. This combination of micro-competencies in a consistent framework promises a holistic, authentic and longitudinal perspective of the medical student’s development and maturing PIF.

Background: Heralded as a teaching, assessment and reflective tool, and increasingly as a longitudinal and holistic perspective of the educator’s development, medical educator’s portfolios (MEP)s are increasingly employed to evaluate progress, assess for promotions and career switches, used as a reflective tool and as a means of curating educational activities. However, despite its blossoming role, there is significant dissonance in the content and structure of MEPs. As such, a systematic scoping review (SSR) is proposed to identify what is known of MEPs and its contents. Methods: Krishna’s Systematic Evidenced Based Approach (SEBA) was adopted to structure this SSR in SEBA of MEPs. SEBA’s constructivist approach and relativist lens allow data from a variety of sources to be considered to paint a holistic picture of available information on MEPs. Results: From the 12 360 abstracts reviewed, 768 full text articles were evaluated, and 79 articles were included. Concurrent thematic and content analysis revealed similar themes and categories including: (1) Definition and Functions of MEPs, (2) Implementing and Assessing MEPs, (3) Strengths and limitations of MEPs and (4) electronic MEPs. Discussion: This SSR in SEBA proffers a novel 5-staged evidence-based approach to constructing MEPs which allows for consistent application and assessment of MEPs. This 5-stage approach pivots on assessing and verifying the achievement of developmental milestones or ‘micro-competencies’ that facilitate micro-credentialling and effective evaluation of a medical educator’s development and entrust-ability. This allows MEPs to be used as a reflective and collaborative tool and a basis for career planning.

Background: Medical professionalism enhances doctor-patient relationships and advances patient-centric care. However, despite its pivotal role, the concept of medical professionalism remains diversely understood, taught and thus poorly assessed with Singapore lacking a linguistically sensitive, context specific and culturally appropriate assessment tool. A scoping review of assessments of professionalism in medicine was thus carried out to better guide its understanding. Methods: Arksey and O’Malley’s (2005) approach to scoping reviews was used to identify appropriate publications featured in four databases published between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2018. Seven members of the research team employed thematic analysis to evaluate the selected articles. Results: 3799 abstracts were identified, 138 full-text articles reviewed and 74 studies included. The two themes identified were the context-specific nature of assessments and competency-based stages in medical professionalism. Conclusions: Prevailing assessments of professionalism in medicine must contend with differences in setting, context and levels of professional development as these explicate variances found in existing assessment criteria and approaches. However, acknowledging the significance of context-specific competency-based stages in medical professionalism will allow the forwarding of guiding principles to aid the design of a culturally-sensitive and practical approach to assessing professionalism.

Background: Mentoring is crucial to the growth and development of mentors, mentees, and host organisations. Yet, the process of mentoring in surgery is poorly understood and increasingly mired in ethical concerns that compromise the quality of mentorship and prevent mentors, mentees, and host organisations from maximising its full potential. A systematic scoping review was undertaken to map the ethical issues in surgical mentoring to enhance understanding, assessment, and guidance on ethical conduct. Methods: Arksey and O’Malley’s methodological framework was used to guide a systematic scoping review involving articles published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2018 in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, ScienceDirect, Mednar, and OpenGrey databases. Braun and Clarke’s thematic analysis approach was adopted to compare ethical issues in surgical mentoring across different settings, mentee and mentor populations, and host organisations. Results: A total of 3849 abstracts were identified, 464 full-text articles were retrieved, and 50 articles were included. The 3 themes concerned ethical lapses at the levels of mentor or mentee, mentoring relationships, and host organisation. Conclusions: Mentoring abuse in surgery involves lapses in conduct, understanding of roles and responsibilities, poor alignment of expectations, and a lack of clear standards of practice. It is only with better structuring of mentoring processes and effective support of host organisation tasked with providing timely, longitudinal, and holistic assessment and oversight will surgical mentoring overcome prevailing ethical concerns surrounding it.

In undergraduate and postgraduate medical education, mentoring offers personalized training and plays a key role in continuing medical education and the professional development of healthcare professionals. However, poor structuring of the mentoring process has been attributed to failings of the host organization and, as such, we have conducted a scoping review on the role of the host organization in mentoring programs. Guided by Levac et al’s methodological framework and a combination of thematic and content analysis, this scoping review identifies their “defining” and secondary roles. Whilst the “defining” role of the host is to set standards, nurture, and oversee the mentoring processes and relationships, the secondary roles comprise of supporting patient care and specific responsibilities toward the mentee, mentor, program, and organization itself. Critically, striking a balance between structure and flexibility within the program is important to ensure consistency in the mentoring approach whilst accounting for the changing needs and goals of the mentees and mentors.

Mentoring's success in enhancing a mentee's professional and personal development, and a host organisations' reputation has been called into question, amidst a lack of effective tools to evaluate mentoring relationships and guide oversight of mentoring programs. A scoping review is proposed to map available literature on mentoring assessment tools in Internal Medicine to guide design of new tools. The review aims to explore how novice mentoring is assessed in Internal Medicine, including the domains assessed, and the strengths and limitations of the assessment methods. Guided by Levac et al.'s framework for scoping reviews, 12 reviewers conducted independent literature reviews of assessment tools in novice mentoring in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ERIC, Cochrane, GreyLit, Web of Science, Open Dissertations and British Education Index databases. A 'split approach' saw research members adopting either Braun and Clarke's approach to thematic analysis or directed content analysis to independently evaluate the data and improve validity and objectivity of the findings. 9662 abstracts were identified, 187 full-text articles reviewed, and 54 full-text articles included. There was consensus on the themes and categories identified through the use of the split approach, which were the domains assessed and methods of assessment. Most tools fail to contend with mentoring's evolving nature and provide mere snap shots of the mentoring process largely from the mentee's perspective. The lack of holistic, longitudinal and validated assessments propagate fears that ethical issues in mentoring are poorly recognized and addressed. To this end, we forward a framework for the design of 'fit for purpose' multi-dimensional tools. Most tools focus on the mentee's perspective, do not consider mentoring's evolving nature and fail to consider mentoring holistically nor longitudinallyA new tool capable of addressing these gaps must also consider inputs from all stakeholders and take a longitudinal perspective of mentoring.

Background Mentoring’s pivotal role in nurturing professional identity formation (PIF) owes much to its combined use with supervision, coaching, tutoring, instruction, and teaching. However the effects of this combination called the ‘mentoring umbrella’ remains poorly understood. This systematic scoping review thus aims to map current understanding. Methods A Systematic Evidence-Based Approach guided systematic scoping review seeks to map current understanding of the ‘mentoring umbrella’ and its effects on PIF on medical students and physicians in training. It is hoped that insights provided will guide structuring, support and oversight of the ‘mentoring umbrella’ in nurturing PIF. Articles published between 2000 and 2021 in PubMed, Scopus, ERIC and the Cochrane databases were scrutinised. The included articles were concurrently summarised and tabulated and concurrently analysed using content and thematic analysis and tabulated. The themes and categories identified were compared with the summaries of the included articles to create accountable and reproducible domains that guide the discussion. Results A total of 12201 abstracts were reviewed, 657 full text articles evaluated, and 207 articles included. The three domains identified were definitions; impact on PIF; and enablers and barriers. The mentoring umbrella shapes PIF in 3 stages and builds a cognitive base of essential knowledge, skills and professional attitudes. The cognitive base informs thinking, conduct and opinions in early supervised clinical exposure in Communities of practice (COP). The COPs’ individualised approach to the inculcation of desired professional characteristics, goals, values, principles and beliefs reshapes the individual’s identity whilst the socialisation process sees to their integration into current identities. Conclusion The mentoring umbrella’s provides personalised longitudinal support in the COP and socialisation process. Understanding it is key to addressing difficulties faced and ensuring holistic and timely support.

Background Poor communication skills can potentially compromise patient care. However, as communication skills training (CST) programs are not seen as a priority to many clinical departments, there is a discernible absence of a standardised, recommended framework for these programs to be built upon. This systematic scoping review (SSR) aims to gather prevailing data on existing CSTs to identify key factors in teaching and assessing communication skills in the postgraduate medical setting. Methods Independent searches across seven bibliographic databases (PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, ERIC, CINAHL, Scopus and Google Scholar) were carried out. Krishna’s Systematic Evidence-Based Approach (SEBA) was used to guide concurrent thematic and content analysis of the data. The themes and categories identified were compared and combined where possible in keeping with this approach and then compared with the tabulated summaries of the included articles. Results Twenty-five thousand eight hundred ninety-four abstracts were identified, and 151 articles were included and analysed. The Split Approach revealed similar categories and themes: curriculum design, teaching methods, curriculum content, assessment methods, integration into curriculum, and facilitators and barriers to CST. Amidst a wide variety of curricula designs, efforts to develop the requisite knowledge, skills and attitudes set out by the ACGME current teaching and assessment methods in CST maybe categorised into didactic and interactive methods and assessed along Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Learning Evaluation. Conclusions A major flaw in existing CSTs is a lack of curriculum structure, focus and standardisation. Based upon the findings and current design principles identified in this SSR in SEBA, we forward a stepwise approach to designing CST programs. These involve 1) defining goals and learning objectives, 2) identifying target population and ideal characteristics, 3) determining curriculum structure, 4) ensuring adequate resources and mitigating barriers, 5) determining curriculum content, and 6) assessing learners and adopting quality improvement processes.

Background Empathy is pivotal to effective clinical care. Yet, the art of nurturing and assessing empathy in medical schools is rarely consistent and poorly studied. To inform future design of programs aimed at nurturing empathy in medical students and doctors, a review is proposed. Methods This systematic scoping review (SSR) employs a novel approach called the Systematic Evidence Based Approach (SEBA) to enhance the reproducibility and transparency of the process. This 6-stage SSR in SEBA involved three teams of independent researchers who reviewed eight bibliographic and grey literature databases and performed concurrent thematic and content analysis to evaluate the data. Results In total, 24429 abstracts were identified, 1188 reviewed, and 136 included for analysis. Thematic and content analysis revealed five similar themes/categories. These comprised the 1) definition of empathy, 2) approaches to nurturing empathy, 3) methods to assessing empathy, 4) outcome measures, and 5) enablers/barriers to a successful curriculum. Conclusions Nurturing empathy in medicine occurs in stages, thus underlining the need for it to be integrated into a formal program built around a spiralled curriculum. We forward a framework built upon these stages and focus attention on effective assessments at each stage of the program. Tellingly, there is also a clear need to consider the link between nurturing empathy and one’s professional identity formation. This foregrounds the need for more effective tools to assess empathy and to better understand their role in longitudinal and portfolio based learning programs.