Already a specialist, still a trainee: recognizing dual professional identity in subspecialty fellowship
Clicks: 50
ID: 321298
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Emerging Content
14.7
/100
50 views
22 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
EmergingRanked #21 of 62 articles by views in the nigerian postgraduate medical journal
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Dear Editor, Simpson and colleagues argue that praise for trainees’ resilience can draw attention away from the structural conditions that make such resilience necessary [1]. Their analysis points to a related difficulty: training structures may allow trainee status in a new subspecialty to obscure expertise that a physician has already earned in a core discipline. Where subspecialty fellowship follows training that permits autonomous practice in a core specialty, physicians enter a new field as learners but remain qualified specialists [2]. This creates a dual professional position: specialist in one domain, trainee in another. Fellowship should therefore recalibrate autonomy to context whilst preserving recognition of prior expertise. Two qualitative studies illustrate this tension. Chiel and colleagues described new fellows as “novice experts”: unfamiliar systems, knowledge, roles and responsibilities made them feel inexperienced even as others expected expertise [3]. Chan and colleagues similarly found that setting, language, responsibilities, and privileges shaped the identities of qualified specialists in further training; participants described dissonance when they delivered consultant-level care whilst still labelled trainees [4]. These accounts point to a possible mismatch between a physician’s credentialled competence and the identity recognized by the institution. This mismatch can be framed as a “recognition gap.” Direct evidence remains sparse, so this should be treated as a working concept to be tested, not an established outcome.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7168690352
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Ömer Denizhan Tatar |
| Journal | the nigerian postgraduate medical journal |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/postmj/qgag092
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.