ArticlePerspectives on medical education2026
Charged Topics in Medical Education: Students' Perspectives on Power, Voices, and Faculty Engagement.
Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Introduction: Medical education learning environments involve charged topics at the intersection of social, political, and cultural domains. Growing student diversity and political polarization add complexity to the discussion of charged topics, yet current literature lacks insight into student perspectives. This study explores how medical students position themselves during charged topic discussions and their preferences for educators' engagement. Methods: Using educational cultural hegemony as a theoretical framework and a critical constructivist approach, the research team conducted semi-structured interviews with sensitizing scenarios addressing three charged topics: gun control, reproductive healthcare coverage, and affirmative action. Following IRB approval, twenty medical students across all training years were interviewed. Transcripts were analyzed using Braun and Clarke's reflexive thematic analysis. Findings: We identified four themes: 'Constrained Voices' describes how power hierarchies influence student engagement with charged conversations. 'Burdened Voices' reveals how marginalized students bear a disproportionate burden when educator avoidance of discussions can reinforce dominant perspectives. 'Finding Voice' highlights how students use personal experience to center patient perspectives despite hierarchical constraints. In 'Guiding Voice', students describe the ideal educator as one who uses their experience and evidence-based knowledge to facilitate discussions. Conclusion: Power hierarchies constrain student engagement in charged discussions, with marginalized students bearing a disproportionate burden when educators avoid these topics. Despite these constraints, students assert agency through personal experience to center patient perspectives. Students seek educators who actively guide discussions using expertise and evidence, viewing neutrality as itself a stance. The findings underscore the need for faculty development addressing these dynamics.
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.