ObjectivesResearch has suggested beneficial effects of self‐regulated learning (SRL) for medical students' and residents' workplace‐based learning. Ideally, learners go through a cyclic process of setting learning goals, choosing learning strategies and assessing progress towards goals. A clear overview of medical students' and residents' successful key strategies, influential factors and effective interventions to stimulate SRL in the workplace is missing. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of and a theoretical base for effective SRL strategies of medical students and residents for their learning in the clinical context.MethodsThis systematic review was conducted according to the guidelines of the Association for Medical Education in Europe. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, PsycINFO, ERIC and the Cochrane Library from January 1992 to July 2016. Qualitative and quantitative studies were included. Two reviewers independently performed the review process and assessed the methodological quality of included studies. A total of 3341 publications were initially identified and 18 were included in the review.ResultsWe found diversity in the use of SRL strategies by medical students and residents, which is linked to individual (goal setting), contextual (time pressure, patient care and supervision) and social (supervisors and peers) factors. Three types of intervention were identified (coaching, learning plans and supportive tools). However, all interventions focused on goal setting and monitoring and none on supporting self‐evaluation.ConclusionsSelf‐regulated learning in the clinical environment is a complex process that results from an interaction between person and context. Future research should focus on unravelling the process of SRL in the clinical context and specifically on how medical students and residents assess their progress towards goals.

Self-regulated learning of medical students in the clinical environment is different for every individual. The factors influencing this process are affected by personal, social and contextual attributes. Some of these are similar to those known from previous research in classroom settings, but others are unique to the clinical environment and include the facilities available, the role of patients, and social relationships pertaining to peers and other hospital staff. To better support students' SRL, we believe it is important to increase students' metacognitive awareness and to offer students more tailored learning opportunities.

Where do we stand now? In the 30 years that have passed since The Edinburgh Declaration on Medical Education, we have made tremendous progress in research on fostering ‘self‐directed and independent study’ as propagated in this declaration, of which one prime example is research carried out on problem‐based learning. However, a large portion of medical education happens outside of classrooms, in authentic clinical contexts. Therefore, this article discusses recent developments in research regarding fostering active learning in clinical contexts. Self‐regulated, lifelong learning in medical education Clinical contexts are much more complex and flexible than classrooms, and therefore require a modified approach when fostering active learning. Recent efforts have been increasingly focused on understanding the more complex subject of supporting active learning in clinical contexts. One way of doing this is by using theory regarding self‐regulated learning (SRL), as well as situated learning, workplace affordances, self‐determination theory and achievement goal theory. Combining these different perspectives provides a holistic view of active learning in clinical contexts. Entry to practice, vocational training and continuing professional development Research on SRL in clinical contexts has mostly focused on the undergraduate setting, showing that active learning in clinical contexts requires not only proficiency in metacognition and SRL, but also in reactive, opportunistic learning. These studies have also made us aware of the large influence one's social environment has on SRL, the importance of professional relationships for learners, and the role of identity development in learning in clinical contexts. Additionally, research regarding postgraduate lifelong learning also highlights the importance of learners interacting about learning in clinical contexts, as well as the difficulties that clinical contexts may pose for lifelong learning. However, stimulating self‐regulated learning in undergraduate medical education may also make postgraduate lifelong learning easier for learners in clinical contexts.

Objective: The assessment of behavioral disturbances in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is important because of the overlap with the behavioral variant of frontotemporal dementia (ALS-bvFTD). Motor symptoms and dysarthria are not taken into account in currently used behavioral questionnaires. We examined the clinimetric properties of a new behavioral questionnaire for patients with ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis-Frontotemporal Dementia-Questionnaire [ALS-FTD-Q]). Methods:In addition to other clinimetric properties, we examined reliability, clinical validity, and construct validity of the ALS-FTD-Q, using data from patients with ALS (n ϭ 103), ALS-bvFTD (n ϭ 10), bvFTD (n ϭ 25), muscle disease control subjects (n ϭ 39), and control subjects (n ϭ 31). Construct validity of the ALS-FTD-Q was assessed using the Frontal Systems Behavior scale (FrSBe), Frontal Behavioral Inventory (FBI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, ALS Functional Rating ScaleϪRevised, Frontal Assessment Battery, Mini-Mental State Examination, and a fluency index. In addition, the point prevalence of behavioral disturbances according to the ALS-FTD-Q was compared with those obtained with the FrSBe and FBI. Results:The internal consistency of the ALS-FTD-Q was good (Cronbach ␣ ϭ 0.92). The ALS-FTD-Q showed construct validity because it correlated highly with other behavioral measures (r ϭ 0.80 and 0.79), moderately with measures of frontal functions and global cognitive functioning (r ϭ 0.37; r ϭ 0.32), and poorly with anxiety/depression and motor impairment (r ϭ 0.18 for both). The ALS-FTD-Q discriminated between patients with ALS-bvFTD, patients with ALS, and control subjects. The point prevalence of behavioral disturbances in patients with ALS measured with the ALS-FTD-Q was lower than that for the FrSBe and FBI.