The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Impostor syndrome among physicians and physicians in training: A scoping review
Abstract
Context: Impostor syndrome ( IS ) is increasingly recognised as a condition among physicians and physicians in training. Impostor syndrome is especially problematic because of its association with increased rates of burnout and suicide. In order to address this issue, we need to fully understand its prevalence, scope, and factors associated with IS . The purpose of this scoping review is to analyse the existing literature on IS among practising physicians and physicians in training in order to identify current trends and directions for future research. Methods: The authors conducted a literature search of nine databases for any articles on IS among practising physicians or physicians in training published prior to January 2019. Two reviewers independently screened articles and identified 18 papers meeting the study inclusion criteria. Two authors independently extracted data and performed quantitative and qualitative syntheses consistent with best practice recommendations for scoping reviews. Results: Most studies utilised the Clance Impostor Phenomenon Scale and cited rates of IS ranging from 22% to 60%. Studies found that gender, low self‐esteem and institutional culture were associated with higher rates of IS , whereas social support, validation of success, positive affirmation, and both personal and shared reflections were protective. Overall, IS was also associated with higher rates of burnout. Conclusions: This review summarises the existing literature on IS among practising physicians and physicians in training, providing valuable insights and areas for future research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1978) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 53,488
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.2.191 · Cited by 43,925
Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework
Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005) · International Journal of Social Research Methodology · doi:10.1080/1364557032000119616 · Cited by 36,742
Scoping studies: advancing the methodology
Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O'Brien, K. K. (2010) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-5-69 · Cited by 15,268
Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change
Bandura, A. (1978) · Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/0146-6402(78)90002-4 · Cited by 10,586
Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis.
Stajković, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.124.2.240 · Cited by 3,782
Shanafelt, T. D., Boone, S., Tan, L., Dyrbye, L. N., Sotile, W., Satele, D., West, C. P., Sloan, J., & Oreskovich, M. R. (2012) · Archives of Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2012.3199 · Cited by 3,439
Shanafelt, T. D., Hasan, O., Dyrbye, L. N., Sinsky, C., Satele, D., Sloan, J., & West, C. P. (2015) · Mayo Clinic Proceedings · doi:10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.08.023 · Cited by 2,885
The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention.
Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978) · Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice · doi:10.1037/h0086006 · Cited by 2,212
Self-Efficacy Beliefs as Shapers of Children's Aspirations and Career Trajectories
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (2001) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00273 · Cited by 2,129
Cited by
Educational interventions for imposter phenomenon in healthcare: a scoping review
Siddiqui, Z. K., Church, H. R., Jayasuriya, R., Boddice, T., & Tomlinson, J. (2024) · BMC Medical Education · doi:10.1186/s12909-023-04984-w · Cited by 65
Neufeld, A., Babenko, O., Lai, H., Svrcek, C., & Malin, G. (2023) · Teaching and Learning in Medicine · doi:10.1080/10401334.2022.2056741 · Cited by 58
The impostor phenomenon among doctoral students: a scoping review
Wang, Y., & Li, W. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1233434 · Cited by 50
Zhou, C., Okafor, C., Hagood, J., & DeLisser, H. M. (2021) · Medical Education Online · doi:10.1080/10872981.2021.1905918 · Cited by 19
‘Insight’ in medical training: what, why, and how?
Ng, I. K. S., Lin, N. H. Y., Goh, W. G. W., Teo, D. B., Tan, L. F., & Ban, K. H. K. (2024) · Postgraduate Medical Journal · doi:10.1093/postmj/qgad115 · Cited by 14
Metadata
- Authors
- Gottlieb, M., Chung, A., Battaglioli, N., Sebok‐Syer, S. S., & Kalantari, A.
- Venue
- Medical Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2019-11-06
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 116-124
- ISSN
- 0308-0110 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2923
- OpenAlex
- W2985146058
- Cited by
- 312
- References
- 47
- FWCI
- 27.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Impostor syndrome among physicians and physicians in training: A scoping review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/medu.13956
- The paper
- Gottlieb, M., Chung, A., Battaglioli, N., Sebok‐Syer, S. S., & Kalantari, A. (2020). Impostor syndrome among physicians and physicians in training: A scoping review. Medical Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13956
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.