Is research on professional identity formation biased? Early insights from a scoping review and metasynthesis

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Abstract

Objective: Despite a recent surge in literature identifying professional identity formation (PIF) as a key process in physician development, the empiric study of PIF in medicine remains in its infancy. To gain insight about PIF, the authors examined the medical literature and that of two other helping professions. Methods: The authors conducted a scoping review and qualitative metasynthesis of PIF in medicine, nursing and counselling/psychology. For the scoping review, four databases were searched using a combination of keywords to identify empiric studies on PIF in trainees. After a two-step screening process, thematic analysis was used to conduct the metasynthesis on screened articles. Results: A total of 7451 titles and abstracts were screened; 92 studies were included in the scoping review. Saturation was reached in the qualitative metasynthesis after reviewing 29 articles. Conclusion: The metasynthesis revealed three inter-related PIF themes across the helping professions: the importance of clinical experience, the role of trainees’ expectations of what a helping professional is or should be, and the impact of broader professional culture and systems on PIF. Upon reflection, most striking was that only 10 of the 92 articles examined trainee's sociocultural data, such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age and socio-economic status, in a robust way and included them in their analysis and interpretation. This raises the question of whether conceptions of PIF suffer from sociocultural bias, thereby disadvantaging trainees from diverse populations and preserving the status quo of an historically white, male medical culture.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)119-132
Number of pages14
JournalMedical education
Volume53
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2019

Fingerprint

identity formation
trainee
empirics
profession
counseling psychology
medicine
sexual orientation
nursing
ethnicity
physician
interpretation
gender
trend
economics

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education

Cite this

@article{0fae8b7cd9144d68a5e08f922aa53823,
title = "Is research on professional identity formation biased? Early insights from a scoping review and metasynthesis",
abstract = "Objective: Despite a recent surge in literature identifying professional identity formation (PIF) as a key process in physician development, the empiric study of PIF in medicine remains in its infancy. To gain insight about PIF, the authors examined the medical literature and that of two other helping professions. Methods: The authors conducted a scoping review and qualitative metasynthesis of PIF in medicine, nursing and counselling/psychology. For the scoping review, four databases were searched using a combination of keywords to identify empiric studies on PIF in trainees. After a two-step screening process, thematic analysis was used to conduct the metasynthesis on screened articles. Results: A total of 7451 titles and abstracts were screened; 92 studies were included in the scoping review. Saturation was reached in the qualitative metasynthesis after reviewing 29 articles. Conclusion: The metasynthesis revealed three inter-related PIF themes across the helping professions: the importance of clinical experience, the role of trainees’ expectations of what a helping professional is or should be, and the impact of broader professional culture and systems on PIF. Upon reflection, most striking was that only 10 of the 92 articles examined trainee's sociocultural data, such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age and socio-economic status, in a robust way and included them in their analysis and interpretation. This raises the question of whether conceptions of PIF suffer from sociocultural bias, thereby disadvantaging trainees from diverse populations and preserving the status quo of an historically white, male medical culture.",
author = "Volpe, {Rebecca L.} and Margaret Hopkins and Paul Haidet and Wolpaw, {Daniel R.} and Adams, {Nancy E.}",
year = "2019",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/medu.13781",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "53",
pages = "119--132",
journal = "Medical Education",
issn = "0308-0110",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is research on professional identity formation biased? Early insights from a scoping review and metasynthesis

AU - Volpe, Rebecca L.

AU - Hopkins, Margaret

AU - Haidet, Paul

AU - Wolpaw, Daniel R.

AU - Adams, Nancy E.

PY - 2019/2/1

Y1 - 2019/2/1

N2 - Objective: Despite a recent surge in literature identifying professional identity formation (PIF) as a key process in physician development, the empiric study of PIF in medicine remains in its infancy. To gain insight about PIF, the authors examined the medical literature and that of two other helping professions. Methods: The authors conducted a scoping review and qualitative metasynthesis of PIF in medicine, nursing and counselling/psychology. For the scoping review, four databases were searched using a combination of keywords to identify empiric studies on PIF in trainees. After a two-step screening process, thematic analysis was used to conduct the metasynthesis on screened articles. Results: A total of 7451 titles and abstracts were screened; 92 studies were included in the scoping review. Saturation was reached in the qualitative metasynthesis after reviewing 29 articles. Conclusion: The metasynthesis revealed three inter-related PIF themes across the helping professions: the importance of clinical experience, the role of trainees’ expectations of what a helping professional is or should be, and the impact of broader professional culture and systems on PIF. Upon reflection, most striking was that only 10 of the 92 articles examined trainee's sociocultural data, such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age and socio-economic status, in a robust way and included them in their analysis and interpretation. This raises the question of whether conceptions of PIF suffer from sociocultural bias, thereby disadvantaging trainees from diverse populations and preserving the status quo of an historically white, male medical culture.

AB - Objective: Despite a recent surge in literature identifying professional identity formation (PIF) as a key process in physician development, the empiric study of PIF in medicine remains in its infancy. To gain insight about PIF, the authors examined the medical literature and that of two other helping professions. Methods: The authors conducted a scoping review and qualitative metasynthesis of PIF in medicine, nursing and counselling/psychology. For the scoping review, four databases were searched using a combination of keywords to identify empiric studies on PIF in trainees. After a two-step screening process, thematic analysis was used to conduct the metasynthesis on screened articles. Results: A total of 7451 titles and abstracts were screened; 92 studies were included in the scoping review. Saturation was reached in the qualitative metasynthesis after reviewing 29 articles. Conclusion: The metasynthesis revealed three inter-related PIF themes across the helping professions: the importance of clinical experience, the role of trainees’ expectations of what a helping professional is or should be, and the impact of broader professional culture and systems on PIF. Upon reflection, most striking was that only 10 of the 92 articles examined trainee's sociocultural data, such as race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age and socio-economic status, in a robust way and included them in their analysis and interpretation. This raises the question of whether conceptions of PIF suffer from sociocultural bias, thereby disadvantaging trainees from diverse populations and preserving the status quo of an historically white, male medical culture.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060155051&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060155051&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/medu.13781

DO - 10.1111/medu.13781

M3 - Review article

C2 - 30656747

AN - SCOPUS:85060155051

VL - 53

SP - 119

EP - 132

JO - Medical Education

JF - Medical Education

SN - 0308-0110

IS - 2

ER -