ArticleBMC medical education2025
Teacher engagement in health profession education: a scoping review.
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.
- Vitality and Challenging Commitment in Times of Digital Intensification: Evidence for Healthy Educational Organizations Based on Teacher Engagement in Chile.European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTeacher engagement (TE) is crucial since it substantially impacts students' academic achievement, personal growth, and general well-being. While extensive research has explored TE in various university settings, there is a noticeable gap in studies focusing on the context of health professions education (HPE). In HPE, TE is key in fostering/developing clinical competencies, critical thinking, communication, and teamwork skills essential for effective healthcare delivery. However, the literature on TE in HPE is fragmented and controversial, with conflicting findings regarding its relationship to student outcomes and professional satisfaction. Our scoping review aims to explore and address these gaps.
methodsThis study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) methodology. Seven online databases were used to identify relevant literature. Out of 249 articles, 18 were selected for analysis.
resultsStudies on TE used varied dimensions and measurement tools, making it challenging to understand the concept consistently. Also, five studies employed the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9), two used the Engaged Teacher Scale (ETS), another two used a Chinese adaptation of the work engagement scale, and one used both the UWES-17 and a faculty engagement questionnaire. Qualitative studies highlighted key factors such as job satisfaction, feedback, autonomy, and professional development opportunities. The outcomes were categorized into personal satisfaction, teaching practices, student engagement, self-efficacy, job satisfaction, retention, and teaching performance.
conclusionThe analysis demonstrates a growing interest in TE within HPE, though there is a notable lack of consistency in how it is defined and measured. Further research is essential to deepen this understanding and to develop targeted strategies that cultivate a mutually beneficial and sustainable teaching and learning environment.
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.