Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39390436›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2024

A systematic scoping review on group non-written reflections in medical education.

Neha Burla, Rui Song Ryan Ong, Ryan Choon Hoe Chee, Ruth Si Man Wong, Shao Yun Neo, Nur Amira Binte Abdul Hamid, Crystal Lim, Eng Koon Ong, Nagavalli Somasundaram, Lalit Kumar Radha Krishna

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

10 authors.

Neha BurlaYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
Rui Song Ryan OngYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
Ryan Choon Hoe CheeYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
Ruth Si Man WongYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
Shao Yun NeoYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore.
Nur Amira Binte Abdul HamidDivision of Cancer Education, National Cancer Centre Singapore, 30 Hospital Boulevard, Singapore, 168583, Singapore.
Crystal LimMedical Social Services, Singapore General Hospital, Outram Road, Singapore, 169608, Singapore.
Eng Koon OngDivision of Supportive and Palliative Care, National Cancer Centre Singapore, 30 Hospital Boulevard, Singapore, 168583, Singapore.
Nagavalli SomasundaramDivision of Cancer Education, National Cancer Centre Singapore, 30 Hospital Boulevard, Singapore, 168583, Singapore.
Lalit Kumar Radha KrishnaYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, NUHS Tower Block, 1E Kent Ridge Road, Level 11, Singapore, 119228, Singapore. lalit.radha-krishna@liverpool.ac.uk.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical education is tasked with shaping how medical students and physicians think, feel and act as professionals, or their Professional Identity Formation (PIF). This process has traditionally rested upon imparting knowledge; integrating sociocultural, professional and organizational expectations and codes of conduct; inculcating program and practice beliefs, values and principles (belief systems); and imbuing shared identities - quintessential elements that, together, comprise the socialization process. Key to supporting this socialization process is reflective practice. However, regnant approaches to mobilizing reflective cycles are faced with resource, personnel and time constraints, hindering efforts to nurture PIF. Group non-written reflections (GNWR) - broadly defined as facilitator-led discussions of shared reflective experiences within groups of learners - may prove to be an effective compromise. To address diverse approaches and a lack of effective understanding, we propose a systematic scoping review (SSR) to map the current use of GNWR in medical training and its role in shaping PIF.

methodsGuided by the Systematic Evidence-Based Approach (SEBA)'s constructivist ontological and relativist epistemological position, this SSR in SEBA searched for articles on GNWR published in PubMed, Embase, Psychinfo, CINAHL, ERIC, ASSIA, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, Open Grey, GreyLit and ProQuest databases. The data found was concurrently analyzed using thematic and direct content analysis. Complementary themes and categories identified were combined, creating the domains that framed the discussion.

resultsOf the 8560 abstracts and 336 full-text articles reviewed, 98 articles were included. The four domains identified were: (1) Indications of use and their value; (2) Structure and how they can be used; (3) Models of reflective practice in GNWR; and (4) Features of communities of practice and the socialisation process.

conclusionThis SSR in SEBA concludes that GNWR does impact PIF when effectively structured and supported. The Krishna-Pisupati Model for PIF platforms a model that explains GNWR's effects of PIF and advances fourteen recommendations to maximize GNWR use.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalGroup ProcessesHumansSocial IdentificationStudents, MedicalGroup reflectionMedical educationMedical studentsMedicineNon-written reflectionPhysiciansProfessional identity formationReflection

Identifiers

PMID39390436
PMCPMC11468106

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.