ReviewCureus2026
Educational Interventions for Professional Identity Formation in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
Professional identity formation (PIF) is the process through which medical students integrate professional values, norms, and behaviours into their developing professional identity. Although PIF is increasingly recognised as an educational goal in undergraduate medical education (UGME), intervention research remains heterogeneous in educational approaches, theoretical foundations, outcome measurement, and geographic distribution. This scoping review mapped educational interventions designed to support PIF in UGME, their theoretical foundations, outcome and measurement approaches, and geographic and income-group distribution. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and ERIC were searched for English-language studies published from 2010 to 2025, supplemented by grey literature and citation searching. Studies addressing PIF-focused educational interventions among undergraduate medical students were eligible. Two reviewers independently screened records, with disagreements resolved through discussion or adjudication by a third reviewer. Data were charted using a piloted form and narratively synthesised using an inductively derived seven-category intervention taxonomy. Fifty-two studies from 21 countries were included. Interventions comprised clinical exposure (n=13, 25.0%), humanities/arts (n=11, 21.2%), reflective/narrative approaches (n=9, 17.3%), mentorship (n=7, 13.5%), mixed interventions (n=5, 9.6%), simulation (n=4, 7.7%), and peer learning (n=3, 5.8%). Identity development was the predominant outcome (n=32, 61.5%). Theoretical or conceptual frameworks were reported in 44 studies (84.6%), whereas eight (15.4%) reported none. Validated instruments were used in only three studies (5.8%). Forty-nine studies (94.2%) originated from high-income countries, two (3.8%) from lower-middle-income countries, and one (1.9%) from an upper-middle-income country. Four studies reported null or near-null effects. PIF intervention research remains theoretically heterogeneous, measurement-limited, and geographically concentrated. Greater use of validated, culturally responsive measures and longitudinal, context-sensitive research, particularly in low- and middle-income settings, is needed.
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.