Intracurricular Factors Influencing Medical Students' Specialty Choice: A Systematic Review.

IF 1.8 Q2 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES Advances in Medical Education and Practice Pub Date : 2024-11-23 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/AMEP.S491008
Birte Schoon, Thomas Kötter
{"title":"Intracurricular Factors Influencing Medical Students' Specialty Choice: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Birte Schoon, Thomas Kötter","doi":"10.2147/AMEP.S491008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Medical school graduates are faced with the difficult decision of choosing a specialty training program. Understanding the decision criteria as well as the intracurricular factors-which have been studied less frequently and thus lack clarity-may help to prevent an impending shortage of certain specialists and to ensure the recruitment of young doctors into supposedly less popular specialties. Evidence-based changes to the medical curriculum are needed to support the balanced development of health care systems with demand-driven staffing of all specialties, especially in the outpatient sector and in rural areas. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the intracurricular factors that influence medical students' choice of specialty that have been described in the international literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria to the 2537 primary results and 19 hits from an additional manual search, data were extracted from 334 studies. In addition, a quality assessment of all included studies was performed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 14 influencing factors were identified from the reviewed literature, of which \"clinical-practical experience\", \"clinical role models\", and \"voluntary offerings\" were mentioned most frequently. We sorted the factors into four main categories: \"Teaching\"; \"Teaching environment, influence and interaction\"; \"Curriculum\"; and \"Voluntary work\". The studies were highly heterogeneous regarding research methods and the quality of reporting.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Involving students in the planning and structuring of clinical phases, active feedback, voluntary offerings, seminars/simulations, and involvement in the clinical team can increase a specialty preference. Conversely, discrimination, prejudice and poor quality of teaching and clinical exposure may act as a deterrent. It is necessary to sensitize medical staff regarding their role and influence in the decision-making process. Further prospective and qualitative research is needed to address this issue adequately.</p>","PeriodicalId":47404,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","volume":"15 ","pages":"1127-1140"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11605303/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Medical Education and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/AMEP.S491008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Medical school graduates are faced with the difficult decision of choosing a specialty training program. Understanding the decision criteria as well as the intracurricular factors-which have been studied less frequently and thus lack clarity-may help to prevent an impending shortage of certain specialists and to ensure the recruitment of young doctors into supposedly less popular specialties. Evidence-based changes to the medical curriculum are needed to support the balanced development of health care systems with demand-driven staffing of all specialties, especially in the outpatient sector and in rural areas. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the intracurricular factors that influence medical students' choice of specialty that have been described in the international literature.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted by searching Medline. After applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria to the 2537 primary results and 19 hits from an additional manual search, data were extracted from 334 studies. In addition, a quality assessment of all included studies was performed.

Results: A total of 14 influencing factors were identified from the reviewed literature, of which "clinical-practical experience", "clinical role models", and "voluntary offerings" were mentioned most frequently. We sorted the factors into four main categories: "Teaching"; "Teaching environment, influence and interaction"; "Curriculum"; and "Voluntary work". The studies were highly heterogeneous regarding research methods and the quality of reporting.

Conclusion: Involving students in the planning and structuring of clinical phases, active feedback, voluntary offerings, seminars/simulations, and involvement in the clinical team can increase a specialty preference. Conversely, discrimination, prejudice and poor quality of teaching and clinical exposure may act as a deterrent. It is necessary to sensitize medical staff regarding their role and influence in the decision-making process. Further prospective and qualitative research is needed to address this issue adequately.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
影响医学生专业选择的校外因素:系统回顾。
背景:医学院毕业生面临着选择专业培训项目的艰难抉择。了解决策标准和内部因素——这些研究较少,因此缺乏清晰度——可能有助于防止某些专家即将出现的短缺,并确保招募年轻医生进入那些被认为不太受欢迎的专业。需要对医学课程进行循证改革,以支持卫生保健系统的平衡发展,满足所有专业人员的需求,特别是在门诊部门和农村地区。本系统回顾的目的是找出国际文献中描述的影响医学生专业选择的课外因素。方法:通过Medline检索进行系统评价。在将纳入和排除标准应用于2537个主要结果和来自额外人工搜索的19个命中后,从334项研究中提取数据。此外,对所有纳入的研究进行了质量评估。结果:从文献综述中共识别出14个影响因素,其中“临床实践经验”、“临床榜样”和“志愿奉献”被提及最多。我们将这些因素分为四大类:“教学”;“教学环境、影响与互动”;“课程”;和“志愿工作”。这些研究在研究方法和报告质量方面存在高度异质性。结论:让学生参与临床阶段的规划和结构,主动反馈,自愿奉献,研讨会/模拟,以及参与临床团队可以增加专业偏好。相反,歧视、偏见、教学质量差和临床暴露可能会起到威慑作用。有必要使医务人员认识到他们在决策过程中的作用和影响。需要进一步的前瞻性和定性研究来充分解决这一问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in Medical Education and Practice
Advances in Medical Education and Practice EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
189
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Impact of Simulation-Based Surgical Training in Laparoscopy on Satisfaction Level and Proficiency in Surgical Skills. Challenges and Difficulties During the Nursing Internship Program Using 5 Domains: A Cross-Sectional Study. Application of Artificial Intelligence Generated Content in Medical Examinations. Predictive Validity of Preclerkship Performance Metrics on USMLE Step 2 CK Outcomes in the Step 1 Pass/Fail Era. Career Planning in Medical Students Rotating Through Obstetrics and Gynecology: The Role of Self-Efficacy, Social Support, and Personal Participation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1