ArticleBMC medical education2026
Mapping educational scholarship in a mixed-financing health system: a scoping review of health professions education research in Singapore.
Article in BMC 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMore than a decade since the 2010 landmark Lancet Commission called for systems-based reforms, aligning health professions education (HPE) with health system needs remains a global imperative. The aim of this scoping review was to systematically examine the literature on adult learning among Singapore’s healthcare professionals to provide evidence to guide national improvement and inform global adaptation. The study focuses on Singapore as a case of a system characterized by mixed-financing and open access to specialist care.
methodsThis scoping review followed the methodological framework established by Arksey and O’Malley, incorporating enhancements by Peters et al. The review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews checklist. We conducted a comprehensive search of the PubMed, ERIC, SCOPUS, and CINAHL in February 2025. Publications and abstracts describing, examining, referencing, or commenting on adult learning in Singapore were included without time restriction. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, with full-text review confirming relevance. Screening was managed using the Covidence systematic review software.
resultsThe search identified 762 unique articles, with 58 studies meeting the final inclusion criteria. From these, we systematically mapped the characteristics, quality, and evidence gaps of the HPE research landscape in Singapore. Key characteristics include concentration in nursing and medicine, a predominance of survey-based methods, and a focus on lower-level Kirkpatrick outcomes. While simulation and online learning are increasingly being studied, we identified significant evidence gaps in postgraduate assessment, educational scholarship, multi-institutional studies, and evaluation of higher-level outcomes. DISCUSSION: The mapped characteristics of Singapore’s HPE research suggest a link between the health system’s structure and research feasibility. Rather than demonstrating causality, our analysis generates a testable hypothesis about this relationship. The study offers a replicable methodology for other systems to map their own research landscapes and provides a clear agenda for future inquiry into these systemic influences, advancing the global goal of contextually relevant HPE.
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.