Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39104362›Full record

ArticleMedical education2025

Using theoretical engagement to understand workplace learning across contexts-Bringing worlds apart together.

Francisco M Olmos-Vega, Renée E Stalmeijer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Francisco M Olmos-VegaPontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0003-1629-4309
Renée E StalmeijerSchool of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8690-5326

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The pivotal importance of workplace learning (WPL) within health professions education has elevated its understanding and improvement to a major research priority. From a sociocultural learning theory perspective, WPL is inherently situated and context-specific. This means that the health care settings in which (future) health care professionals are trained will impact how and what is learned. However, to what extent is the research performed thus far transferable across professional contexts, cultures and borders? To what extent has WPL research sufficiently addressed the contextual characteristics of WPL to enable the evaluation of its transferability? To what extent have methodological and theoretical approaches enabled the building of understanding across contexts? We propose that heightening the transferability of WPL research as well as opening up the conversation to more diverse WPL contexts, settings and cultures will require mapping context and theoretical engagement. To explore what theoretical engagement may afford to our understanding of the influence of context on WPL, we use two theories: Landscapes of Practice and Figured Worlds. These theories with sociocultural groundings provide concrete lenses to understand the interplay between the individual and the context. We conclude with implications for research and practice and advocate for more attention to research practices that may deepen our understanding and heighten the transferability of workplace learning research.

Indexed as

LearningWorkplaceHealth PersonnelHumans

Identifiers

PMID39104362
PMCPMC11662299

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.