# Exploring “Talent” in Medical Education: A Scoping Review

**Authors:** Rebecca Preyra, Sujata Mishra, Heba Khan, Shreya Saha, Armaanpreet Dhillon, Amy Keuhl, Sandra Monteiro, Elizabeth M. Wooster, Michael Gottlieb, Alexander Peever, Teresa M. Chan

PMC · DOI: 10.5334/pme.1859 · Perspectives on Medical Education · 2026-02-04

## TL;DR

This paper reviews how the term 'talent' is used in medical education, finding it is often undefined and conflated with other terms.

## Contribution

The study provides a comprehensive scoping review of 'talent' and related terms in medical education literature.

## Key findings

- Only 25% of reviewed papers directly mentioned the term 'talent', while 75% used related terms.
- Most studies focused on identifying high-potential individuals, especially in medical school selection.
- There is a lack of clear definitions or theoretical frameworks for 'talent' in medical education.

## Abstract

The term ‘talent’ appears in health professions education (HPE) but is variably defined and often conflated with performance proxies. Through a scoping review, the authors sought to map how ‘talent’ and related terms are used/defined in medical education across stages and use cases.

A scoping review (Arksey-O’Malley; Levac; PRISMA-ScR) with descriptive mapping and content analysis of charted items was performed. The search was conducted across OVID-Medline, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, focusing on studies related to talent in medical education from 1946 to May 20, 2024. The authors included not only the term talent but also broadened the review to include adjacent concepts, such as aptitude and giftedness. Two reviewers independently assessed titles, abstracts and full texts using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A third reviewer resolved screening discrepancies. Relevant concepts were mapped for reporting, and a content analysis identified research gaps, trends, and patterns across global, regional and specialty contexts. The papers were tiered into two groups: Tier 1, directly mentioning the term talent; Tier 2, adjacent terms often related to talent.

The authors reviewed 189 studies loosely related to talent in medical education: 47 (25%) were Tier 1 papers that directly mentioned talent, and 142 (75%) were Tier 2 (adjacent terms). The literature primarily originated from North America (41%, 77/189) and Europe (30%, 56/189) Most papers focused on identifying individuals with high potential (74%, 141/189), particularly in medical school selection, while less attention was given to themes like retention, equity and leadership.

Although 47 papers contained the term “talent”, there was a paucity of papers that defined talent within medical education or applied a framework/theory. Interdisciplinary research may be a way to better introduce this concept to our field.

## Full-text entities

- **Species:** Homo sapiens (human, species) [taxon 9606]

## Full text

_Full body text omitted from this summary view._ Fetch the complete paper as Markdown: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12879997/full.md

## Figures

3 figures with captions in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12879997/full.md

## References

157 references — full list in the complete paper: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12879997/full.md

---
Source: https://tomesphere.com/paper/PMC12879997