Leadership Education for Doctors-A Scoping Review

Clinical leadership is essential for patient safety and effective healthcare delivery. While leadership training is increasingly integrated into medical education, there is no consensus on how to define, teach, or evaluate these skills. This scoping review aimed to map the existing literature on medical clinical leadership training and identify gaps.

Following PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted across five major databases. Eligible studies were original studies involving any interventions with the purpose of improving leadership skills of participants, where most participants were doctors or medical students. Studies were screened and selected by multiple reviewers, and data were charted using a tool constructed for this study. Synthesis and thematic analysis were conducted with support from Datalab at the Library of Copenhagen University.

Sixty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Out of these, 47 employed descriptive pre/post designs. Clinical leadership was defined explicitly by 15 studies, though a thematic analysis identified nine shared elements, including communication, emotional intelligence, and patient safety. Teaching methods varied, with simulations and lectures being most common. Out of 62 studies, 36 relied on self-assessment for evaluation and satisfaction surveys, with limited long-term or objective outcome measures. Evaluation methods of 56 studies fell within Kirkpatrick's levels 1 and 2, focusing on reaction and learning, rather than behavior- or long-term changes.

Clinical leadership education is a growing but fragmented field. A clearer definition of clinical leadership, teaching methods, and evaluation tools are needed to improve future training programs and assess their effectiveness.

This scoping review summarizes the current literature regarding education on clinical leadership skills. More specifically the authors identified nine themes of clinical leadership by using a thematic analysis method, and also reported on different teaching and assessment methods. By assessing altogether 62 studies, concerning mainly doctors and medical students as learners, they identified a need for defining clinical leadership, and the teaching and evaluation methods more clearly.