Conceptualisation and Psychometric Operationalisation of Professional Identity Formation in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review Protocol
Le résumé fourni par la source
Background: Professional Identity Formation (PIF) is a central outcome of medical education, reflecting how students internalise the values, roles, and behaviours of the profession. Although recognised as a complex and multidimensional construct, its conceptualisation across the literature remains heterogeneous and lacks consistent operationalisation. Increasingly, psychometric instruments are used to operationalise and measure PIF, with emerging evidence suggesting their ability to capture developmental change. However, the extent to which these measures reflect underlying theoretical frameworks remains unclear, highlighting the need to better understand how PIF is operationalised. Objective: This scoping review aims to comprehensively map how PIF is conceptualised and psychometrically operationalised in undergraduate medical education, and to examine the alignment between theoretical foundations and measurement approaches. Methods: A scoping review will be conducted in accordance with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) methodology and reported following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines. Comprehensive literature searches will be conducted across electronic databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and PsycINFO, from January 2000 to April 2026. Studies examining the conceptualisation and/or psychometric measurement of PIF in undergraduate medical education will be included. Data will be charted and synthesised, and a narrative synthesis will be conducted. Conclusion: This scoping review will provide an overview of how PIF is conceptualised and psychometrically operationalised in undergraduate medical education. Findings will identify gaps in the alignment between theory and measurement and inform future research and development of PIF assessment approaches.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.