ArticleBMC medical education2025
Professional identity formation for underrepresented groups in medicine: challenges and interventions for Dutch medical schools: a systematic 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.
- Melanin Medics: lessons from a community-led organization addressing inequities in medical education.Frontiers in medicine · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe concept of intersectionality is important when considering the professional identity formation (PIF) of students who are racially and ethnically underrepresented in medicine (URiM), as they must navigate race and ethnicity within the medical landscape. Despite a growing body of studies that shed light on the challenges that URiM students face in their PIF, there remains a notable lack of practical interventions for medical schools to address these challenges. Our objective is to highlight the challenges faced by URiM students and identify interventions in the literature that would be most suitable for Dutch medical schools to address them.
methodsThis study builds upon Teo et al.'s (2022) scoping review. We examined articles from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2021, and conducted an extended search from January 1, 2022, to November 30, 2023. Our focus was on articles exploring the intersectionality of PIF, perspectives of minoritized groups, and diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within the context of PIF in medical education. We used the Systematic Evidence-Based Approach (SEBA) guided systematic scoping review, encompassing four stages: Systematic Approach, Structured Summary and Synthesis, Jigsaw Perspective, and Literature Analysis.
resultsA total of 692 abstracts were reviewed, 36 full-text articles were evaluated, and 22 articles were included. URiM students encounter multiple challenges in their PIF journeys such as a lack of role models and representation, experiences of microaggressions, and pressure to assimilate into the majority culture. The proposed interventions for medical schools included diversifying recruitment practices to create more role models, developing curricula to address these challenges, and establishing a supportive network for URiM students.
conclusionsOur study highlights the pressing need for Dutch medical schools to address the challenges faced by URiM students in PIF. The identified interventions offer actionable strategies to cultivate a more supportive and equitable learning environment. The implementation of these interventions has the potential to enhance URiM students' educational experiences, reduce disparities, and promote diversity within the medical profession. These findings underscore the importance of ongoing efforts to prioritize inclusivity and equity in medical education.
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.