Introduction: The field historically known as medical education (MEDED) has increasingly adopted the label of health professions education (HPE), signaling expansion beyond medicine. This terminological shift is evident in the scope of journals and the names of conferences and degree programs, but it appears to have occurred without the formal consensus of the health professions it now claims to represent. As disciplinary language influences identity, legitimacy, and power, it is critical to examine whether this represents a transition to genuine inclusivity or a relabeling that maintains existing structures. Understanding how journals contribute to this discursive shift is essential for charting the field's future identity.
Methods: We conducted a terminology analysis of four established journals that advertise an HPE focus (Academic Medicine, Medical Education, Medical Teacher, and Teaching and Learning in Medicine), from their inception through June 2025. Using Scopus, we searched titles, abstracts, and keywords for MEDED-only, HPE-only, and combined usage patterns.
Results: Our search pulled 48,846 non-unique articles, with MEDED continuing to dominate across the four journals. In 2024, there was a 15:1 ratio of MEDED-only to HPE-only publications (599 vs. 40 articles). While HPE terminology first appeared in 1973, its use remained relatively dormant until 2009-2010, with subsequent modest growth spikes in 2016-2017 and 2023-2024 that varied across journals.
Discussion: Despite the explicit inclusion of HPE in journals' stated scope statements, HPE-focused publications remain a small minority. These findings highlight a disconnect between the aspirational inclusivity and the MEDED-centered reality of the journal's publications. This tension signals limited interdisciplinary expansion and potentially a nominal rebranding of traditional MEDED hierarchies.
Keywords: Medical education; health professions education; interprofessional; professional identity; scholarship.