4.6 Article

Primary Care, the ROAD Less Traveled: What First-Year Medical Students Want in a Specialty

期刊

ACADEMIC MEDICINE
卷 88, 期 10, 页码 1522-1528

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3182a316eb

关键词

-

资金

  1. American College of Physicians

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Medical students are increasingly choosing non-primary-care specialties. Students consider lifestyle in selecting their specialty, but how entering medical students perceive lifestyle is unknown. This study investigates how first-year students value or rate lifestyle domains and specialty-selection characteristics and whether their ratings vary by interest in primary care (PC). Method During the 2012-2013 academic year, the authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of first-year medical students from 11 MD-granting medical schools. Using a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = not important at all; 5 = extremely important), respondents rated the importance of 5 domains of good lifestyle and 21 characteristics related to specialty selection. The authors classified students into five groups by PC interest and assessed differences by PC interest using one-way analysis of variance. Results Of 1,704 participants, 1,020 responded (60%). The option type of work I am doing was the highest-rated lifestyle domain (mean 4.8, standard deviation [SD] 0.6). Being satisfied with the job was the highest-rated specialty-selection characteristic (mean 4.7, SD 0.5). Availability of practice locations in rural areas was rated lowest (mean 2.0, SD 1.1). As PC interest decreased, the importance of opportunities to work with underserved populations also decreased, but importance of average salary earned increased (effect sizes of 0.98 and 0.94, respectively). Conclusions First-year students valued enjoying work. The importance of financial compensation was inversely associated with interest in PC. Examining the determinants of enjoyable work may inform interventions to help students attain professional fulfillment in PC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据