Skip to main content

Table 1 PICOs inclusion and exclusion criteria

From: A systematic scoping review of reflective writing in medical education

 

Inclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria

Search #1: Theories of reflection in medical education

 Population

• Healthcare personnel and educators in allied health specialities and medicine

• Undergraduate and postgraduate medical students

• Physicians

• Non-healthcare educators and specialities

 Intervention

• Papers addressing theory building relevant to reflection or reflective practices in education

• Evaluation of reflective practices without reference to theory relating to reflection or reflective practices in education

• Evaluation of reflective practices for purposes other than improving reflective capacity of users

• Papers with little detail on implementation or assessment details of reflective writing

 Comparison Outcome

• Comparison of various modes of reflective practices and how they differed in terms of theory

• Impact of the use of reflective writing within the clinical, medical, research and/or academic settings

 Papers that discussed reflective writing without the above comparisons were also included

 

 Study design

• All study designs including mixed methods research, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, descriptive papers, grey literature, opinions, letters, commentaries and editorials

• Articles in English or translated to English

• Year of Publication: Jan 2000–Jun 2022

• Non-English language articles

Search #2: Reflective writing in medical education

 Population

• Junior doctors, residents, specialists and/or doctors and/or physicians and/or medical students within the clinical, medical, research and/or academic settings

• Undergraduate and postgraduate medical students

• Allied health specialties such as Pharmacy, Dietetics, Chiropractic, Midwifery, Podiatry, Speech Therapy, Occupational and Physiotherapy, Physician Assistants

• Non-medical specialties such as Clinical and Translational Science, Alternative and Traditional Medicine, Veterinary, Dentistry

 Intervention

• Papers that addressed the incorporation of reflective writing for junior doctors, residents, specialists and/or doctors and/or physicians and/or medical students within the clinical, medical, research and/or academic settings

• Papers that addressed assessment of reflective writing

• Papers with little detail of implementation or assessment of reflective writing in curriculum

• Papers that evaluated reflective writing for purposes other than improving reflective capacity of users

 Comparison Outcome

Papers that addressed the following comparisons were also included:

 • Comparison of the various uses of reflective writing in different teaching settings

 • Evaluation of the effectiveness of reflective writing in comparison to other educational interventions

 • Papers that discussed reflective writing without the above comparisons were also included

Papers that measured the following outcomes were also included:

 • Impact of the use of reflective writing on junior doctors, residents, specialists and/or doctors and/or physicians and/or medical students within the clinical, medical, research and/or academic settings

 • Impact of the use of reflective writing on teaching

 • Impact of the use of reflective writing on assessment

 • Gaps and improvements to current reflective writing programs

 

 Study design

• All study designs including: mixed methods research, meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, cross-sectional studies, descriptive papers, grey literature, opinions, letters, commentaries and editorials

• Articles in English or translated to English

• Year of Publication: Jan 2000–Jun 2022

• Non-English language articles