Professional identity formation (PIF) within medical education is the multifaceted, individualized process through which students develop new ways of being in becoming physicians. Personal backgrounds, values, expectations, interests, goals, relationships, and role models can all influence PIF and may account for diversity of both experience and the active constructive process of professional formation. Guided reflection, including reflective writing, has been used to enhance awareness and meaning making within the PIF process for both students and medical educators and to shed light on what aspects of medical education are most constructive for healthy PIF. Student voices about the PIF process now emerging in the literature are often considered and interpreted by medical educators within qualitative studies or in broad theoretical overviews of PIF.In this Commentary, the authors present a chorus of individual student voices from along the medical education trajectory. Medical students (years 1-4) and a first-year resident in pediatrics respond to a variety of questions based on prevalent PIF themes extracted from the literature to reflect on their personal experiences of PIF. Topics queried included pretending in medical education, role of relationships, impact of formal and informal curricula on PIF (valuable aspects as well as suggestions for change), and navigating and developing interprofessional relationships and identities. This work aims to vividly illustrate the diverse and personal forces at play in individual students' PIF processes and to encourage future pedagogic efforts supporting healthy, integrated PIF in medical education.

BACKGROUND

Over 20 million Americans are currently or have been incarcerated. Most are from medically underserved populations; 1 in 3 African American men and 1 in 6 Latino men born in 2001 are projected to go to prison during their lifetime. The amount of funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to understand and improve the health of persons involved with the criminal justice system is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To describe NIH funding for research on the health and health care needs of criminal justice-involved persons.

DESIGN

Review of NIH grants (2008-2012) in the RePORT (Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools) database.

SETTING

U.S. criminal justice system.

PATIENTS

Criminal justice-involved persons participating in NIH-funded clinical research.

MEASUREMENTS

NIH research and training grants awarded, by number, type, research area, institute or center, and dollar amount.

RESULTS

Of more than 250 000 NIH-funded grants, 180 (<0.1%) focused on criminal justice health research. The 3 most common foci were substance use or HIV (64%), mental health (11%), and juvenile health (8%). The National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute of Mental Health funded 78% of all grants. In 2012, the NIH invested $40.9 million in criminal justice health research, or 1.5% of the $2.7 billion health disparities budget for that year.

LIMITATION

NIH-supported research that did not explicitly include current or former prisoners but may have relevance to criminal justice health was not included.

CONCLUSION

Federal funding for research focused on understanding and improving the health of criminal justice-involved persons is small, even compared with the NIH's overall investment in health disparities research. The NIH is well-positioned to transform the care of current and former prisoners by investing in this critical yet overlooked research area.