ArticleFrontiers in medicine2026
A four-step implementation framework for professionalism competency in undergraduate medical education.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
Professionalism is a core competency in undergraduate medical education, yet many schools still rely on implicit teaching and inconsistent responses to professionalism lapses. Reports showing how institutions operationalize professionalism across standards, teaching, assessment, and learner support remain limited, especially in settings where cultural norms shape communication, accountability, family involvement, and conduct. We describe an evidence-guided, theory-informed implementation framework developed during a two-year institutional improvement cycle at the College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University. The development approach combined literature review, benchmarking, a structured nominal group process with core faculty, committee deliberation, and stakeholder review. The resulting framework comprised four steps: clear understanding, curricular integration, standardized assessment, and remediation with well-being support. It defined professionalism for physicians and translated the same construct for medical students across academic, clinical, and community settings; embedded teaching through an expectation-experience-evaluation cycle; introduced a common assessment package; and linked coaching, committee review, mentoring, and counseling within a developmental response pathway. The design drew on situated and experiential learning, reflective practice, professional identity formation, and programmatic assessment. Early implementation indicators showed broader curricular integration: professionalism moved from two early courses to a spiral curriculum, most preclinical modules include expectation-setting sessions, and longitudinal courses use reflection assignments. Professionalism is now graded within a must-pass competency framework in the first two years; problem-based learning engagement grades align with the rubric; and all clerkships use a standardized professionalism rubric that contributes 10% of clerkship marks. During the first year of implementation, approximately 60% of reported incidents were investigated by the committee; in the current phase, approximately 60% are managed at clerkship level, with fewer cases referred for committee review. The main contribution is a transferable four-step approach that schools can adapt while preserving the implementation sequence and localizing standards, learning activities, assessment anchors, and support pathways.
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.