CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 144Innovations in Medical EducationHealth and Medical EducationClinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills

Mapping the dark matter of context: A conceptual scoping review.

Bates, Joanna, Ellaway, Rachel H·2016·Medical Education
DOI 10.1111/medu.13034
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

CONTEXT: Like dark matter, the contexts for medical education are largely invisible to those within them, although context can have profound influences on teaching, learning and practice. For something that is so intrinsic to the field of medical education, the concept of context remains troubling to scholars and those running medical education programmes. This paper reports on a critical and conceptual review of the concept of context within the medical education literature and beyond. METHODS: A review was undertaken drawing on two sources: concepts of context in the medical education literature, and concepts of context across multiple academic disciplines. This body of material was iteratively, discursively and inductively synthesised. RESULTS: Few of the articles from the medical education literature described or defined context directly, tending instead to focus on describing specific elements of context, such as clinical disciplines, physical settings and political pressures, that could or did influence learning outcomes. The results were framed in terms of what context 'is', how context works (in terms of context-mechanism-outcome), and how context can be represented using patterns. The authors propose a definition of context in medical education, along with the means to model, contrast and compare different contexts based on recurring patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Context matters in medical education and it can, despite many challenges, be considered systematically and objectively. The findings from this study both represent a catalyst and challenge medical education researchers to look at context afresh.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/medu.13034

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The Medical Research Council framework recommends undertaking exploratory studies to ensure understanding and accounting for factors that influence the outcomes of an intervention before conducting comparative effectiveness studies.

    “The Medical Research Council framework recommends undertaking exploratory studies to ensure understanding and accounting for factors that influence the outcomes of an intervention (e.g., the R2C2 model) before conducting comparative effectiveness studies.”

    From The R2C2 Model in Residency Education: How Does It Foster Coaching and Promote Feedback Use? (2018) · cites this paper as [23]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Bates, J., & Ellaway, R. H.
Affiliations
  • University of British Columbia (CA)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Bates, Joanna
ORCID
Venue
Medical Education
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-07-11
Volume
50
Issue
8
Pages
807-816
ISSN
  • 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2923
DOI
10.1111/medu.13034
OpenAlex
W2471581953
Cited by
144
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2012: 1
FWCI
1.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Medical Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health and Medical Education
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
Keywords
context-mechanism-outcome, context patterns, interdisciplinarity
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Education, Medical, Humans, Learning, Motivation, Professional Practice Location, Students, Medical, Models, Educational

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