Interest in leadership development in healthcare is substantial. Yet it remains unclear which interventions are most reliably associated with positive outcomes. We focus on the important area of physician leadership development in a systematic literature review of the latest research from 2007 -2016. The paper applies a validated instrument used for medical education, MERSQI, to the included studies. Ours is the first review in this research area to create a tiered rating system to assess the best available evidence. We concentrate on findings from papers in the highly-rated categories. First, our review concludes that improvements in individual-level outcomes can be achieved (e.g. knowledge, motivation, skills, and behavior change). Second, development programs can substantially improve organizational and clinical outcomes. Third, some of the most effective interventions include: workshops, videotaped simulations, multisource feedback (MSF), coaching, action learning, and mentoring. Fourth, the evidence suggests that objective outcome data should be collected at baseline, end of program, and retrospectively. An outcomes-based approach appears to be the most effective design of programs. We also make recommendations for future research and practice.

Most Widening Participation (WP) research is focused on medical school recruitment; there is a paucity of research examining whether the experience of medical school itself is an equal experience for both 'traditional' and WP students. This qualitative systematic review used the Joanna Briggs Institute meta-aggregative approach to characterise the experience of undergraduate medical education in the UK from the perspective of WP students. Seven databases were searched, 27 studies were critically appraised, and 208 findings were grouped into 12 categories and 4 synthesised findings. The majority of the research found relates to ethnic minority groups, with reports of other WP groups being less frequent.Whilst WP programmes attempt to alleviate disadvantages prior to entering university, our findings suggest that difficulties follow WP students into medical school. Unfamiliarity with higher education and lack of representation of WP staff in faculty can deter help-seeking behaviour and result in lack of trust. Furthermore, students from different backgrounds can find their identity conflicted upon entering medical school.Despite difficulties in establishing social networks with 'traditional' medical student peers, WP students form strong relationships with students from similar backgrounds. Ultimately, these students find that the uniqueness of their experience is a useful tool for communicating with diverse patients which they come across and are able to overcome adversity with the help of a supportive institution.

ObjectiveTo characterise the experience of undergraduate medical education in the UK from the perspective of Widening Participation students. Inclusion criteriaUsing the meta-aggregative approach, this review will include qualitative research conducted in the UK examining any aspect of the lived experience of studying undergraduate medicine according to Widening Participation students, including identity formation, learning experience in pre-clinical environments and clinical placements and the relation to social, cultural and financial capital. MethodsThe study will incorporate journal articles found through the databases MEDLINE, PubMed, WebOfScience, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycInfo and ERIC as well as grey literature. Studies published from 2000 onwards and published in the English language will be included. Studies will be assessed against the inclusion and exclusion criteria at all stages by two independent reviewers. Eligible studies will be critically appraised for methodological quality using the standard Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Qualitative Research (Joanna Briggs Institute, 2017). Regardless of methodological quality, all studies retrieved will be included in the review. The final synthesized findings will be graded according to the ConQual approach (Munn et al., 2014).

If citing, it is advised that you check and use the publisher's definitive version for pagination, volume/issue, and date of publication details. And where the final published version is provided on the Research Portal, if citing you are again advised to check the publisher's website for any subsequent corrections.

No abstract