data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7e1e6/7e1e61f01d233b91960c61442e748a5609c80a7c" alt="Man ultramarathon runner in the mountains he trains at sunset"
94% of researchers rate our articles as excellent or good
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.
Find out more
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article
Front. Med.
Sec. Healthcare Professions Education
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmed.2025.1522411
This article is part of the Research Topic Nurturing Medical Professionalism in Different Cultural Contexts View all 5 articles
The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
Introduction: Medical professionalism (MP) is a vital competency in undergraduate medical students as it enhances the quality and safety of patient care as it includes professional values, attitudes and professional behaviours. However, medical institutes are uncertain about how optimally it can be learnt and assessed. This review aims to systematically provide a summary of evidence from systematic reviews reporting MP educational interventions, their outcomes and sustainability to foster PB.Methods: Eight major databases (CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, Health business, Medline, OVID, PsycINFO, SCOPUS and Web of Science) and grey literature were systematically searched from database inception to June 2024. The inclusion criteria were (1) systematic review studies (2) of educational interventions of any type; (3) targeting any aspect of MP; (4) provided to undergraduate medical students; and (5) with no restrictions on comparator group or outcomes assessed. A qualitative narrative summary of included reviews was conducted as all included reviews did not conduct quantitative nor meta-analysis of results but rather a qualitative summary. Methodological quality of included reviews was assessed using A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) 2 tool.The search identified 397 references for eligibility screening. Ultimately, eight systematic reviews were deemed eligible for inclusion. The majority of these reviews have reported a successful improvement in various aspects of MP (i.e., MP as a whole, empathy and compassion) through teaching and exposure to hidden curriculum. The included studies displayed significant methodological heterogeneity, with varying study designs and assessment methodologies to professional outcomes. A gap remains in reporting the sustainable effect on professionalism traits and on a standardised approach to MP teaching.This review suggests that more interventions are needed in this area with a focus on methodological quality and teaching methods in a multicultural context to support PB and professional identity formation.
Keywords: medical professionalism, Medical professionalism education, Professional behaviour, Systematic review, sustainability, Professional identity formation (PIF)
Received: 04 Nov 2024; Accepted: 18 Feb 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Sadeq, Guraya, Fahey, Clarke, Bensaaud, Doyle, Kearney, Gough, Harbinson, Guraya and Harkin. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Asil Sadeq, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Research integrity at Frontiers
Learn more about the work of our research integrity team to safeguard the quality of each article we publish.