Longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals: a methodological scoping review

Abstract Background Tracking and understanding the progress and experiences of health workers and the outcomes of workforce decisions are essential for evidence-based workforce planning. In this scoping review, we aim to identify longitudinal studies that prospectively tracked healthcare professiona...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yingxi Zhao, Xuan Li, Attakrit Leckcivilize, Mike English
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2025-04-01
Series:BMC Medical Research Methodology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02533-1
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850153637142069248
author Yingxi Zhao
Xuan Li
Attakrit Leckcivilize
Mike English
author_facet Yingxi Zhao
Xuan Li
Attakrit Leckcivilize
Mike English
author_sort Yingxi Zhao
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Background Tracking and understanding the progress and experiences of health workers and the outcomes of workforce decisions are essential for evidence-based workforce planning. In this scoping review, we aim to identify longitudinal studies that prospectively tracked healthcare professionals and that specifically focused on workforce issues such as career preferences, choices, and working conditions, and summarise the different approaches and methods used for tracking. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), EconLit and the Cochrane Library for articles published between 2000–2022 that longitudinally tracked doctors, nurses, midwives, physician associates/assistants. We further compared articles and conducted a back-and-forward citation search to identify longitudinal tracking studies which sometimes have multiple published articles. We developed a typology of the different tracking approaches, and summarised the major areas assessed and tracked by different studies. Results We identified and analysed 263 longitudinal tracking studies. Based on population recruitment and follow-up methods, we grouped studies into seven categories (cohort studies, multiple-cohort studies, baseline and data linkage studies, baseline and short repeated measure studies, baseline-only studies, data linkage-only studies and repeated survey studies). The majority of studies included used a cohort or multiple-cohort design (n = 180), and several others also used data linkage (n = 45) and repeated measure approaches (n = 24). Sixty-two studies recruited participants while they were students and followed them until they became the active workforce, and nearly half of the included studies started directly from the active workforce stage. Most of the included studies examined workforce issues including employment status, preference or intention (to leave/remain/migrate, specific speciality or location etc.), and work environment, however there was a lack of widely used measurement tools for workforce issues. Additionally, nearly 40% examined wellbeing issues and a subset (20%) examined physical health in the context of workforce-related issues. Conclusion We described a large number of different healthcare professional longitudinal tracking studies. In order for longitudinal tracking to contribute to effective workforce planning, we recommend employing a mix of cohort and data linkage approaches to collect data across the different stages of the workforce ‘working lifespan’, and using and continuing to test standardised measurement instruments to better capture experiences related to workforce and wellbeing.
format Article
id doaj-art-30eda7edee224c368f4f46bbc2af04f1
institution OA Journals
issn 1471-2288
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Medical Research Methodology
spelling doaj-art-30eda7edee224c368f4f46bbc2af04f12025-08-20T02:25:40ZengBMCBMC Medical Research Methodology1471-22882025-04-0125111310.1186/s12874-025-02533-1Longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals: a methodological scoping reviewYingxi Zhao0Xuan Li1Attakrit Leckcivilize2Mike English3Nuffield Department of Medicine, NDM Centre for Global Health Research, University of OxfordNuffield Department of Population Health, University of OxfordNuffield Department of Medicine, NDM Centre for Global Health Research, University of OxfordNuffield Department of Medicine, NDM Centre for Global Health Research, University of OxfordAbstract Background Tracking and understanding the progress and experiences of health workers and the outcomes of workforce decisions are essential for evidence-based workforce planning. In this scoping review, we aim to identify longitudinal studies that prospectively tracked healthcare professionals and that specifically focused on workforce issues such as career preferences, choices, and working conditions, and summarise the different approaches and methods used for tracking. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Education Resource Information Center (ERIC), EconLit and the Cochrane Library for articles published between 2000–2022 that longitudinally tracked doctors, nurses, midwives, physician associates/assistants. We further compared articles and conducted a back-and-forward citation search to identify longitudinal tracking studies which sometimes have multiple published articles. We developed a typology of the different tracking approaches, and summarised the major areas assessed and tracked by different studies. Results We identified and analysed 263 longitudinal tracking studies. Based on population recruitment and follow-up methods, we grouped studies into seven categories (cohort studies, multiple-cohort studies, baseline and data linkage studies, baseline and short repeated measure studies, baseline-only studies, data linkage-only studies and repeated survey studies). The majority of studies included used a cohort or multiple-cohort design (n = 180), and several others also used data linkage (n = 45) and repeated measure approaches (n = 24). Sixty-two studies recruited participants while they were students and followed them until they became the active workforce, and nearly half of the included studies started directly from the active workforce stage. Most of the included studies examined workforce issues including employment status, preference or intention (to leave/remain/migrate, specific speciality or location etc.), and work environment, however there was a lack of widely used measurement tools for workforce issues. Additionally, nearly 40% examined wellbeing issues and a subset (20%) examined physical health in the context of workforce-related issues. Conclusion We described a large number of different healthcare professional longitudinal tracking studies. In order for longitudinal tracking to contribute to effective workforce planning, we recommend employing a mix of cohort and data linkage approaches to collect data across the different stages of the workforce ‘working lifespan’, and using and continuing to test standardised measurement instruments to better capture experiences related to workforce and wellbeing.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02533-1Human resources for healthTrackingLongitudinal studyCohortWorkforce
spellingShingle Yingxi Zhao
Xuan Li
Attakrit Leckcivilize
Mike English
Longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals: a methodological scoping review
BMC Medical Research Methodology
Human resources for health
Tracking
Longitudinal study
Cohort
Workforce
title Longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals: a methodological scoping review
title_full Longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals: a methodological scoping review
title_fullStr Longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals: a methodological scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals: a methodological scoping review
title_short Longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals: a methodological scoping review
title_sort longitudinal tracking of healthcare professionals a methodological scoping review
topic Human resources for health
Tracking
Longitudinal study
Cohort
Workforce
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02533-1
work_keys_str_mv AT yingxizhao longitudinaltrackingofhealthcareprofessionalsamethodologicalscopingreview
AT xuanli longitudinaltrackingofhealthcareprofessionalsamethodologicalscopingreview
AT attakritleckcivilize longitudinaltrackingofhealthcareprofessionalsamethodologicalscopingreview
AT mikeenglish longitudinaltrackingofhealthcareprofessionalsamethodologicalscopingreview