This paper aims to explore the use of Balint Groups amongst doctors in training. Reviews published to date have explored the use and effects of Balint groups in general and specifically with medical students, but not solely medical trainees.

A systematic review was conducted, with the following data bases searched: Medline, Embase, Cochrane and PsychINFO. Articles met inclusion criteria if they presented empirical research using quantitative and qualitative methodology, involved junior doctors participating in groups and were written in English. No publication date limit was set.

817 articles were screened after de-duplication. 52 full articles were reviewed for eligibility. 27 articles met inclusion criteria. 12 articles included quantitative data, ten qualitative and five contained both qualitative and quantitative data

Seven papers involved pre- and post-group data collection, six studies involved comparison groups, seven discussed group processes, six discussed trainee experience and four discussed topic themes.

The literature published is heterogenic in methodology, and outcome measures differ widely. Feasibility of running groups and benefits to participants are not clearly evidenced. The authors discuss findings of the literature and explore possible personal and educational effects of Balint groups on trainees, and feasibility of running such groups in this cohort.

本文旨在探讨Balint小组在医生中的使用。迄今为止发表的评论已经探讨了Balint团体的总体使用和效果，特别是针对医学生，而不仅仅是医学生。

进行了系统的审查，并检索了以下数据库：Medline，Embase，Cochrane和PsychINFO。如果文章使用定量和定性方法进行了实证研究，并且参加了小组的初级医生并且使用英语撰写，则符合入选标准。没有设置发布日期限制。

重复数据删除后筛选了817条文章。审查了52篇完整文章的资格。27篇文章符合纳入标准。12篇文章包括定量数据，十篇定性数据，五篇包含定性和定量数据

七篇论文涉及组前和组后的数据收集，六项研究涉及比较组，七项讨论了小组流程，六项讨论了学员经验，四项讨论了主题。

所发表的文献在方法论上是异质的，并且结果测度差异很大。跑步小组的可行性和对参与者的好处尚无明确证据。作者讨论了文献的发现，并探讨了Balint小组对受训者的可能的个人和教育影响，以及在此队列中运行此类小组的可行性。