Background Characterised by feelings of helplessness in the face of clinical, organization and societal demands, medical students are especially prone to moral distress (MD). Despite risks of disillusionment and burnout, efforts to support them have been limited by a dearth of data and understanding of MD in medical students. Yet, new data on how healthcare professionals confront difficult care situations suggest that MD could be better understood through the lens of the Ring Theory of Personhood (RToP). A systematic scoping review (SSR) guided by the RToP is proposed to evaluate the present understanding of MD amongst medical students. Methods The Systematic Evidence-Based Approach (SEBA) is adopted to map prevailing accounts of MD in medical students. To enhance the transparency and reproducibility, the SEBA methodology employs a structured search approach, concurrent and independent thematic analysis and directed content analysis (Split Approach), the Jigsaw Perspective that combines complementary themes and categories, and the Funnelling Process that compares the results of the Jigsaw Perspective with tabulated summaries to ensure the accountability of these findings. The domains created guide the discussion. Results Two thousand six hundred seventy-one abstracts were identified from eight databases, 316 articles were reviewed, and 20 articles were included. The four domains identified include definitions, sources, recognition and, interventions for MD. Conclusions MD in medical students may be explained as conflicts between the values, duties, and principles contained within the different aspects of their identity. These conflicts which are characterised as disharmony (within) and dyssynchrony (between) the rings of RToP underline the need for personalised and longitudinal evaluations and support of medical students throughout their training. This longitudinal oversight and support should be supported by the host organization that must also ensure access to trained faculty, a nurturing and safe environment for medical students to facilitate speak-up culture, anonymous reporting, feedback opportunities and supplementing positive role modelling and mentoring within the training program.

Background and Aim Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a prevalent and complex gastrointestinal disorder characterized by chronic abdominal pain and altered bowel habits. Observational studies have suggested a relationship between serum vitamin D levels and IBS symptoms. This systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to investigate the clinical effects of vitamin D supplementation on IBS symptom severity and quality of life (QoL) measures. Methods Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched. Data abstraction and quality assessment were conducted by four authors independently, and discrepancies were resolved through consensus from the senior author. Continuous data were pooled with standardized mean difference (SMD) using the DerSimonian and Laird's random‐effects model. Sensitivity analysis by risk of bias and potentially “predatory” publication were performed as well. Results A total of 685 patients across eight studies were included in the meta‐analysis. Vitamin D supplementation significantly improved IBS symptom severity scale scores, with a SMD of −0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI] −1.47 to −0.07, P = 0.04, I2 = 91%). Improvements in IBS‐QoL scores were also observed, albeit not statistically significant (SMD 0.54; 95% CI −0.34 to 1.41, P = 0.15, I2 = 87%). However, small sample sizes, a relatively young study population, limited ethnicities, and varied vitamin D dosing strategies across the studies were notable limitations. Conclusions Vitamin D supplementation could be part of our clinical armamentarium when managing IBS patients due to the potential efficacy and good safety profile. Further randomized, controlled trials are required to confirm the therapeutic effects.

BackgroundConcepts of moral distress (MD) among physicians have evolved and extend beyond the notion of psychological distress caused by being in a situation in which one is constrained from acting on what one knows to be right. With many accounts involving complex personal, professional, legal, ethical and moral issues, we propose a review of current understanding of MD among physicians.MethodsA systematic evidence-based approach guided systematic scoping review is proposed to map the current concepts of MD among physicians published in PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, SCOPUS, ERIC and Google Scholar databases. Concurrent and independent thematic and direct content analysis (split approach) was conducted on included articles to enhance the reliability and transparency of the process. The themes and categories identified were combined using the jigsaw perspective to create domains that form the framework of the discussion that follows.ResultsA total of 30 156 abstracts were identified, 2473 full-text articles were reviewed and 128 articles were included. The five domains identified were as follows: (1) current concepts, (2) risk factors, (3) impact, (4) tools and (5) interventions.ConclusionsInitial reviews suggest that MD involves conflicts within a physician’s personal beliefs, values and principles (personal constructs) caused by personal, ethical, moral, contextual, professional and sociocultural factors. How these experiences are processed and reflected on and then integrated into the physician’s personal constructs impacts their self-concepts of personhood and identity and can result in MD. The ring theory of personhood facilitates an appreciation of how new experiences create dissonance and resonance within personal constructs. These insights allow the forwarding of a new broader concept of MD and a personalised approach to assessing and treating MD. While further studies are required to test these findings, they offer a personalised means of supporting a physician’s MD and preventing burn-out.