What question did this study set out to answer?

This review aims to identify success factors, barriers, and outcomes related to coaching in medical education programs.

June 18, 2026Open Access

Coaching in undergraduate and graduate medical education: a scoping review of success factors, barriers, and outcomes

BMBinata MukherjeeFrederick Community College JPJenna PfleegerUniversity of South Alabama HCHaidee CustodioUniversity of South Alabama

Key Points

This review aims to identify success factors, barriers, and outcomes related to coaching in medical education programs.
Conducted a scoping review following PRISMA-ScR guidelines.
Searched databases including PubMed, Scopus, and ERIC until May 2024.
Analyzed articles using thematic and mixed methods analysis, resulting in six identified domains.
Identified six domains related to coaching: overview, program specifics, outcomes, success factors, and barriers.
Coaching programs varied but focused on enhancing competency, wellness, interpersonal skills, and learning.
Success factors included institutional support and proper coach training, while barriers included time constraints and readiness of learners.

Abstract

PURPOSE: Wanting to implement a sustainable learner coaching program in academic medicine and prior exposure to coaching initiatives raised questions, including planning, implementation and assessment, and resource allocation. This scoping review examines coaching across medical learners, reported program elements, success factors, and barriers. METHODS: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, which were informed by Levac et al. on Arksey and O'Malley's framework and Braun and Clarke's thematic analysis, PubMed, Scopus, and ERIC were searched through May 2024. Articles were screened, the data were extracted and coded. The mixed methods analysis included descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Themes/domains were developed and refined through consensus. RESULTS: = 43). Six domains emerged: overview/general, coaching program related, coaching process related, coaching outcomes, coaching success factors, and coaching barriers. The articles reflected a broad conceptualization of coaching in academic medicine. Coaching programs varied in structure but commonly aimed to support competency, wellness, interpersonal skills, and self-directed learning. Reporting on coach recruitment, training, and compensation was inconsistent. Coaching processes incorporated reflection, goal setting, and observation. The coaching outcomes encompassed skills development and personal and professional growth. Success factors included institutional support and coach training; barriers involved time constraints, role ambiguity, and coachee readiness. CONCLUSIONS: Coaching is increasingly used in academic medicine to address diverse and evolving learner needs across settings, within the United States and internationally. This review reveals the conceptual breadth and structural variability of coaching programs and the flexibility of coaching as a practice for individualizing learner success. The findings offer insights and serve as a resource for institutions seeking to develop, implement, or refine coaching initiatives.

Ask AI

Helpful

Bookmark

View Full Paper