Addressing the Socioemotional Dimension of Medical Education: Protocol for a Scoping Review of Student-Driven Development Strategies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current international context, marked by complex global challenges, necessitates the rapid intervention of higher education institutions to contribute to social transformation. Medical education, in particular, is undergoing significant changes influenced by various factors, including the evolving health care environment and shifting social expectations. Socioemotional skills are increasingly recognized as essential competencies for medical professionals, contributing to better patient care, improved communication, and enhanced teamwork. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current literature on strategies employed by medical students to develop and promote their socioemotional skills in academic and hospital settings. METHODS: The review will be conducted according to the guidelines of the Joanna Briggs Institute, and the results will be presented in accordance with PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews). Eligibility criteria include studies focusing on medical students at any stage of their education, addressing strategies for developing socioemotional skills in academic or clinical contexts. Information sources include Embase, Emerald, PsycNet, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, with searches conducted from January 2000 to April 2025. Gray literature sources, including ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global, Conference Proceedings Citation Index, and OpenGrey, will also be searched. Two independent reviewers will screen titles, abstracts, and full texts. Data will be extracted using a standardized form and synthesized through narrative synthesis and thematic analysis. RESULTS: Results from our initial searches indicate a diverse range of literature addressing student-driven strategies for socioemotional skill development in medical education. The scoping review is progressing according to the following timeline. Protocol development and registration was completed in January 2025. Search strategy refinement was completed in February 2025. The initial database searching was expected to be completed in March or April 2025. Title and abstract screening are anticipated to be performed in May or June 2025. Full-text review and data extraction are anticipated to be performed in July to August 2025. Data synthesis and analysis are anticipated to be completed by September or October 2025. The manuscript is expected to be prepared and submitted by November or December 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this review may have significant implications for medical education curricula, informing the integration of socioemotional skill development alongside traditional medical knowledge and technical skills. Furthermore, the review may uncover gaps in the existing literature, highlighting areas that require further research and investigation. This scoping review will contribute to the growing body of knowledge on the importance of socioemotional skills in medical education. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/66757.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.142 | 0.136 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.014 | 0.016 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.081 | 0.015 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".