A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to improve teaching effectiveness in medical education: BEME Guide No. 8
Open accessAbstract
Background Preparing healthcare professionals for teaching is regarded as essential to enhancing teaching effectiveness. Although many reports describe various faculty development interventions, there is a paucity of research demonstrating their effectiveness. Objective To synthesize the existing evidence that addresses the question: "What are the effects of faculty development interventions on the knowledge, attitudes and skills of teachers in medical education, and on the institutions in which they work?" Methods The search, covering the period 1980-2002, included three databases (Medline, ERIC and EMBASE) and used the keywords: staff development; in-service training; medical faculty; faculty training/development; continuing medical education. Manual searches were also conducted. Articles with a focus on faculty development to improve teaching effectiveness, targeting basic and clinical scientists, were reviewed. All study designs that included outcome data beyond participant satisfaction were accepted. From an initial 2777 abstracts, 53 papers met the review criteria. Data were extracted by six coders, using the standardized BEME coding sheet, adapted for our use. Two reviewers coded each study and coding differences were resolved through discussion. Data were synthesized using Kirkpatrick's four levels of educational outcomes. Findings were grouped by type of intervention and described according to levels of outcome. In addition, 8 high-quality studies were analysed in a…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Participants of faculty development programs reported increased knowledge of educational principles.
“Participants of faculty development programs reported increased knowledge of educational principles, gains in teaching skills, positive changes in attitudes toward faculty development and teaching (Steinert et al. 2006).”
From Work engagement in health professions education (2017) · cites this paper as Steinert et al. 2006
Participants of faculty development programs reported positive changes in attitudes toward faculty development and teaching.
“Participants of faculty development programs reported increased knowledge of educational principles, gains in teaching skills, positive changes in attitudes toward faculty development and teaching (Steinert et al. 2006).”
From Work engagement in health professions education (2017) · cites this paper as Steinert et al. 2006
Faculty development programs reported positive outcomes related to changes in organizational practice and the establishment of collegiate networks.
“Another of the reported, positive, outcomes was related to changes in organizational practice and the establishment of collegiate networks -which may lead to social support, also a known job resource.”
From Work engagement in health professions education (2017) · cites this paper as Steinert et al. 2006
Participants of faculty development programs reported gains in teaching skills.
“Participants of faculty development programs reported increased knowledge of educational principles, gains in teaching skills, positive changes in attitudes toward faculty development and teaching (Steinert et al. 2006).”
From Work engagement in health professions education (2017) · cites this paper as Steinert et al. 2006
The NKH approach was developed as a pedagogical framework to support ethical engagement with AI in faculty research education.
“The New Knowledge Help (NKH) approach was developed as a pedagogical framework to support ethical engagement with AI in faculty research education and was operationalised using instructional design principles.”
From Ethical engagement with artificial intelligence in faculty research education: evaluation of the New Knowledge Help (NKH) approach (2026) · cites this paper as [16]
Cites
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 33,219 · see citing works
Barry Issenberg, S., Mcgaghie, W. C., Petrusa, E. R., Lee Gordon, D., & Scalese, R. J. (2005) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/01421590500046924 · Cited by 3,966 · cited 1× · see citing works
“The model has also been used by other BEME groups (e.g. Issenberg et al., 2005) as well as other review groups (e.g. Freeth et al., 2003), and with some modifications, was well suited to our review.”
MethodFramework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health
Campbell, M. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7262.694 · Cited by 3,474 · see citing works
Twelve tips for undertaking a systematic review
Reeves, S., Koppel, I., Barr, H., Freeth, D., & Hammick, M. (2002) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/01421590220145707 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Steinert, Y., Mann, K., Anderson, B., Barnett, B. M., Centeno, A., Naismith, L., Prideaux, D., Spencer, J., Tullo, E., Viggiano, T., et al. (2016) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2016.1181851 · Cited by 845 · see citing works
Self-citationSteinert, Y., Naismith, L., & Mann, K. (2012) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2012.680937 · Cited by 397 · see citing works
Self-citationArtificial Intelligence in Undergraduate Medical Education: A Scoping Review
Lee, J., Wu, A. S., Li, D., & Kulasegaram, K. (. (2021) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000004291 · Cited by 324 · see citing works
Faculty development: From workshops to communities of practice
Steinert, Y. (2010) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/01421591003677897 · Cited by 258 · see citing works
Self-citationZhao, L., Wu, X., & Luo, H. (2022) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su142114549 · Cited by 239 · see citing works
“The research compass”: an introduction to research in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 56
Ringsted, C., Hodges, B., & Scherpbier, A. (2011) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2011.595436 · Cited by 231 · see citing works
Conducting a best evidence systematic review. Part 1: From idea to data coding. BEME Guide No. 13
Hammick, M., Dornan, T., & Steinert, Y. (2010) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/01421590903414245 · Cited by 230 · see citing works
Self-citationDo communities of practice enhance faculty development?
Abigail, L. K. M. (2016) · Health Professions Education · doi:10.1016/j.hpe.2016.08.004 · Cited by 76 · see citing works
Wong, B. M., & Holmboe, E. S. (2016) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000001035 · Cited by 69 · see citing works
Work engagement in health professions education
van den Berg, J. W., Mastenbroek, N. J. J. M., Scheepers, R. A., & Jaarsma, A. D. C. (2017) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.1080/0142159x.2017.1359522 · Cited by 55 · see citing works
Minehart, R. D., Rudolph, J., Pian-Smith, M. C. M., & Raemer, D. B. (2014) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0000000000000058 · Cited by 57 · see citing works
Twelve tips for using the objective structured teaching exercise for faculty development
Boillat, M., Bethune, C., Ohle, E., Razack, S., & Steinert, Y. (2012) · Medical Teacher · doi:10.3109/0142159x.2011.599891 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Self-citationBarriers and facilitators to writing quality items for medical school assessments – a scoping review
Karthikeyan, S., O’Connor, E., & Hu, W. (2019) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-019-1544-8 · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Youm, J., & Corral, J. (2019) · Academic Medicine · doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000002912 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
Competency-based medical education for the clinician-educator: the coming of Milestones version 2
Torralba, K. D., Jose, D., & Katz, J. D. (2020) · Clinical Rheumatology · doi:10.1007/s10067-020-04942-7 · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Naeem, N.-I.-K., Naeem, Z.-E.-F., & Anwer, A. (2026) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-026-09405-2
“In response to these gaps, the New Knowledge Help (NKH) approach was developed as a pedagogical framework to support ethical engagement with AI in faculty research education [16].”
- Authors
- Steinert, Y., Mann, K., Centeno, A., Dolmans, D., Spencer, J., Gelula, M., & Prideaux, D.
- Affiliations
- McGill University (CA)
- Dalhousie University (CA)
- Austral University (AR)
- Maastricht University (NL)
- Newcastle University (GB)
- University of Illinois Chicago (US)
- Flinders University (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Steinert, Yvonne
- Venue
- Medical Teacher
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-01
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 497-526
- ISSN
- 0142-159X (ISSN-L)
- 1466-187X
- OpenAlex
- W2129024928
- Cited by
- 1,417
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 68 · 2025: 86 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 107 · 2022: 60 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 77 · 2019: 80 · 2018: 75 · 2017: 88 · 2016: 102 · 2015: 114 · 2014: 70 · 2013: 89 · 2012: 88
- FWCI
- 4.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Medical Teacher (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Flinders Academic Commons (Flinders University) (submittedVersion)
- Medical Education
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Education
- Keywords
- faculty development, medical education, teaching effectiveness, teacher professional development, continuing medical education, teaching skills, experiential learning, feedback, peer learning, learning outcomes, in-service training, quality of evidence
- MeSH terms
- Cooperative Behavior, Education, Medical, Faculty, Medical, Humans, Staff Development, Teaching, Guidelines as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Internationality
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
