ArticleBMC medical education2026
Qualitative study identifying leadership challenges encountered in real-world scholarly projects within a faculty development program.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFaculty development programs often incorporate structured pieces of academic work, i.e. action learning projects, to provide participants with experiential learning while also addressing real world problems. The Leadership in Academic Medicine Program (LAMP), a faculty development program at Weill Cornell Medicine, contains a project expectation, i.e. a capstone, that culminates in submission of a final written abstract. This study analyzed LAMP capstone abstracts to characterize the scope of projects undertaken, and to identify common leadership challenges encountered by faculty participants during execution of their project.
methodsThis retrospective qualitative review was performed on abstracts submitted between 2017 and 2025. Two investigators discerned unique challenges described in the project abstracts and labelled them as concepts. Similar concepts were clustered into categories, and categories were clustered into themes. Frequencies of concepts were calculated to identify top themes; projects were additionally classified by scholarly type, e.g. research, education, clinical.
resultsThere were 294 abstracts, 42% categorized as research, 37% as clinical quality improvement, and 22% as education. Over time, there was a shift towards more quality improvement (22% to 40%) and education projects (9% to 37%). The authors coded 133 unique concepts, occurring 784 times. Concepts were clustered into 26 categories and from these categories, 6 overarching themes representing leadership challenges were identified: (1) collaborate across area, (2) engage stakeholders, (3) develop something new, (4) negotiate resources, (5) respond to a problem, and (6) change existing culture.
conclusionsIdentification of six prevalent leadership challenges confronted by faculty during execution of distinct types of capstone projects provides unique insights to the needs of faculty leaders, assists with data driven improvements to the LAMP curriculum, and offers guidance to other academic faculty development programs.
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.