ArticleBMC medical education2025
Adaptation and modification of the professional identity formation scale for postgraduate trainees in basic health science: a mixed method study.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploring life skills, research adaptation, and team building among basic medical postgraduates.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe professional identity formation (PIF) of postgraduate trainees in basic health sciences is critical to their educational journey. Yet, appropriate measurement tools are lacking. This research aimed to adapt and modify an existing PIF scale to assess the professional identities of postgraduate basic health sciences trainees.
methodsA mixed-method study was conducted to validate a modified PIF scale. An instrument was developed following AMEE Guide 87 (A. R. Artino et al.) (1). Seven medical educationalists and basic health science postgraduate supervisors established its content validity and reliability. Cognitive interviews were conducted with 15 participants, and the tool was validated through the Delphi technique. Piloting was undertaken on a simple random sample of 500 postgraduate trainees. Psychometric analyses, including structure factor analysis, internal consistency testing, and qualitative content analysis, were used to evaluate the modified scale.
resultsFive factors related to professional identity formation were identified: "Commitment to Professional Identity, belonging and Values," "Pursuit of Knowledge and Excellence," "Professional Growth and Collaboration," Personal Growth and Reflection," and "Confidence and impact." The modified PIF scale demonstrated robust psychometric properties, including a well-defined factor structure, significant reliability, and high internal consistency. With a Cronbach alpha 0.97, the PIF scale's five kept variables accounted for 99.99% of the variance.
conclusionsThe study found the modified PIF scale to be a reliable tool for assessing the professional identities of postgraduate trainees in basic health sciences. It developed a 50-item tool with five valid factors to evaluate professional identity for postgraduate trainees.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.