Educational Interventions for Professional Identity Formation in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review

Professional identity formation (PIF) is the process through which medical students integrate professional values, norms, and behaviours into their developing professional identity. Although PIF is increasingly recognised as an educational goal in undergraduate medical education (UGME), intervention research remains heterogeneous in educational approaches, theoretical foundations, outcome measurement, and geographic distribution. This scoping review mapped educational interventions designed to support PIF in UGME, their theoretical foundations, outcome and measurement approaches, and geographic and income-group distribution. PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and ERIC were searched for English-language studies published from 2010 to 2025, supplemented by grey literature and citation searching. Studies addressing PIF-focused educational interventions among undergraduate medical students were eligible. Two reviewers independently screened records, with disagreements resolved through discussion or adjudication by a third reviewer. Data were charted using a piloted form and narratively synthesised using an inductively derived seven-category intervention taxonomy. Fifty-two studies from 21 countries were included. Interventions comprised clinical exposure (n=13, 25.0%), humanities/arts (n=11, 21.2%), reflective/narrative approaches (n=9, 17.3%), mentorship (n=7, 13.5%), mixed interventions (n=5, 9.6%), simulation (n=4, 7.7%), and peer learning (n=3, 5.8%). Identity development was the predominant outcome (n=32, 61.5%). Theoretical or conceptual frameworks were reported in 44 studies (84.6%), whereas eight (15.4%) reported none. Validated instruments were used in only three studies (5.8%). Forty-nine studies (94.2%) originated from high-income countries, two (3.8%) from lower-middle-income countries, and one (1.9%) from an upper-middle-income country. Four studies reported null or near-null effects. PIF intervention research remains theoretically heterogeneous, measurement-limited, and geographically concentrated. Greater use of validated, culturally responsive measures and longitudinal, context-sensitive research, particularly in low- and middle-income settings, is needed.