Examining Medical Student Specialty Choice Through a Gender Lens: An Orientational Qualitative Study

The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Factors Influencing Iranian Medical Residents' Specialty Selection: A Qualitative Study

Background

Medical students' specialty selection influences the composition of the physician workforce and the effectiveness of health systems. Therefore, the identification of factors that influence the choice of specialty is critical for an evidence-based health policy. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the determinants of specialty choice among Iranian medical residents.

Methods

In early 2022, this qualitative study was conducted among Iranian medical residents in seven provinces, including Tehran, Isfahan, Fars, Khorasan Razavi, Kerman, Kermanshah, and Khuzestan. The participants were selected using a purposeful sampling method. Data were collected using 74 semi-structured in-depth face-to-face interviews. Finally, a thematic content analysis (conventional content analysis) method was applied for data synthesis.

Results

The participant's mean age was 28.7±2.5 years, and more than 52% (N=39) were men. Following data synthesis, 10 sub-themes and four main themes were identified, including educational aspects affected by the pandemic, career-related hazards, personal and professional lifestyles affected by the disease, and experiences and beliefs regarding the pandemic.

Conclusion

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on medical students' educational, professional, and personal aspects of specialty choices. This study demonstrated how the disease affected the choice of specialty. Therefore, the findings could be used for developing national health policy and planning.

COVID-19 and Access to Medical Professional Careers: Does Gender Matter?

OBJECTIVE

To know to what extent home confinement resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the results of the Medical Intern Resident Program (MIR) exam and whether or not a gender gap has occurred as a consequence.

METHOD

Econometric modeling of the final result obtained in the MIR exam and identification of the explanatory factors that determine it and its relevance, effect and meaning.

RESULTS

From the results obtained in the MIR test of the 2019, 2020 and 2021 calls, it can be seen that examinations and academic records together with demographic and calendar factors are determinants to explain the observed behavior of the final result. In relation to the gender factor, the existence of a differential fixed effect in favor of women is shown, although the interaction with the exam shows the opposite result. The nationality variable allows us to visualize a scenario of academic homogeneity. The effect of the calendar directly linked to the COVID-19 pandemic makes it possible to quantify the negative impact exerted on the final result.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) The work reflects the impact of factors such as sex, nationality or the COVID-19 pandemic on access to specialized health training in Spain. (2) In contrast to previous studies, we found a significant difference in behavior between men and women, favorably linked to the female sex. However, the so-called sprint effect associated with the male sex was detected. (3) The negative effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the final score are visualized. The existing differential with respect to the control category is quantified and the dominance of the hierarchical position of the temporal component within the set of explanatory factors is visualized.

The impact of gendered experiences on female medical students' specialty choice: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Women make up 50% of American medical school graduates, yet are not equally represented in the vast spectrum of medical specialties. Many fields within medicine remain male dominated. This systematic review will explore social factors that affect female medical students' specialty choice.

HYPOTHESIS

Gendered experiences influence the specialty choice of female medical students, resulting in their concentration in a specific cohort of specialties.

METHODS

Studies were gathered by searching MEDLINE/Pubmed and EBSCOhost for sociological factors that impact female medical students' specialty choice.

RESULTS

34 articles were selected for this systematic review. Factors that contribute to gender segregation within medical specialties include gender discrimination, socialization, lifestyle considerations, negative perceptions of male-dominated medical specialties and lack of female role models.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review supported the hypothesis that gendered experiences impact women's medical specialty choice, and thus result in their concentration in specialties such as family medicine, pediatrics and obstetrics and gynecology.

What do Iranian physicians value most when choosing a specialty? Evidence from a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Choosing a specialty by physicians is fundamentally linked to the performance of health systems and public health outcomes. Identifying the determinants of specialty selection is important to health policy for targeting resources and planning the development of services. This study examined preferences of Iranian physicians for medical specialty using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) method.

METHODS

In this study, the attributes of the DCE were determined using rigorous qualitative approach. Then we applied D-efficiency criteria to design the DCE and validated it at a pilot study. In the final survey, we recruited participants from six Iranian provinces and analyzed data using conditional logit model. We estimated willingness to pay (WTP) for non-monetary attributes.

RESULTS

The WTP analysis revealed that the most important non-monetary attributes in the selection of a specialty were job burnout, opportunity for procedural activities, and job prestige. The results imply that the attributes that were related to the quality of personal life was more important only for physicians who preferred to choose non-surgical specialties.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings demonstrate that traditional gender patterns of specialty selection are changing and quality of personal life characteristics might be the most important factor when developing policies to recruit physicians into non-surgical specialties.

"I might not fit that doctor image": Ideal worker norms and women medical students

Despite the increasing numbers of women students in medical schools, focused attention on their perceptions about medical school and the medical profession remain underexamined. These perceptions are important to understand, particularly since women students are likely burdened with a host of gender norms related to work, family, and their future roles as physicians. Early experiences in medical school offer important insights into the larger student experience and are tied to academic outcomes and feelings of belonging. To examine early experiences of women medical students, this qualitative study used sensemaking theory to describe the current context and "story" of ideal worker norms. Critical qualitative interviews of 38 women students were performed during their first 2 months of medical school and explored both how the students perceived and experienced ideal worker norms, and how they made sense of the "story" of ideal worker norms. The participants described ways they encountered gendering and ideal worker norms through displays of nurturing behaviour, expectations to balance a future family, and whether they looked or acted the part of a doctor. This article highlights the challenges women medical students are already aware they will face, the opportunities they look forward to, and the strengths they anticipate leaning on to navigate their profession. Results from this study have implications for women medical students' learning experiences and transitions into medical school and for faculty, staff, and scholars concerned with challenging gendering norms that shape medical education.

Creating work environments where people of all genders in gynecologic oncology can thrive: An SGO evidence-based review

Equality, equity, and parity in the workplace are necessary to optimize patient care across all aspects of medicine. Gender-based inequities remain an obstacle to quality of care, including within the now majority women subspecialty of gynecologic oncology. The results of the 2020 SGO State of the Society Survey prompted this evidence-based review. Evidence related to relevant aspects of the clinical care model by which women with malignancies are cared for is summarized. Recommendations are made that include ways to create work environments where all members of a gynecologic oncology clinical care team, regardless of gender, can thrive. These recommendations aim to improve equality and equity within the specialty and, in doing so, elevate the care that our patients receive.

Impact of COVID-19 on residency choice: A survey of New York City medical students

Objectives

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic disrupted medical student education, particularly in New York City (NYC). We aimed to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical students’ residency choices.

Methods

The authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of medical students in all years of study at four NYC medical schools (Columbia, Cornell, NYU, and SUNY Downstate). The survey was fielded from 19 Aug 2020 to 21 Sep 2020. Survey questions included items assessing COVID-19 impact on residency choices, personal impact of COVID-19, residency/specialty choices, and factors influencing these choices.

Results

A total of 2310 students received the survey, with 547 (23.7%) providing partial responses and 212 (9.2%) providing valid responses for our primary analysis. 59.0% of participants thought that COVID-19 influenced their choice of residency/specialty, with 0.9% saying the influence was to a great extent, 22.2% to some extent, and 35.8% very little. On multivariable analysis, factors that were independently associated with COVID-19 impacting residency choice included low debt ($1 to $99,999: _adjOR 2.23, 95%CI 1.02–5.03) compared with no debt and Other race/ethnicity (_adjOR 0.26, 95%CI 0.10–0.63) compared with White race/ethnicity. On secondary analysis of all participants answering survey items for logistic regression regardless of survey completion, direct personal impact of COVID-19 was significantly associated with COVID-19 impacting specialty choice (_adjOR 1.90, 95%CI 1.04–3.52). Moreover, 24 students (11.6%) reported a change in their top residency choice from before to during/after COVID-19, citing concerns about frontline work, work-life balance, and risk of harm.

Conclusions

Our study found that 3 in 5 (59.0%) participants felt that COVID-19 impacted their residency choice, with 11.6% of respondents explicitly changing their top specialty choice. Investigating the impact of the pandemic on medical student residency considerations is crucial to understand how medical career outlooks may change in the future.

Why Do Physicians Choose Pain as a Specialty?

OBJECTIVE

Numerous forces shape the practice of pain management: scientific advances, technical advances, societal expectations, public health crises, reimbursement factors, and the parameters of who gets trained and what motivates the trainees. In this observational study, we sought to determine expressed motivations for entering the subspecialty of pain management, and in particular whether applicants were more interested in procedural skills (our hypothesis) or rehabilitative and cognitive practices.

METHODS

We analyzed the personal statements of 142 applicants to the University of Minnesota's pain medicine fellowship program. In addition to those themes, the personal statements were scrutinized for other themes such as interest in teaching and research. Comprehensive vs interventional/procedural interests were coded by a group of four research assistants who were trained using practice essays until they achieved high interrater reliability (alpha > 0.8). Two of the researchers coded for additional themes on a two-point scale indicating presence or absence of a particular theme. When they did not agree, a third researcher broke the tie. Theme prevalence was compared by specialty and gender.

RESULTS

Residents expressed interest in interventional and comprehensive pain practice without significant differences; however, there were specialty and gender differences in other themes such as teaching, research, and leadership in program development.

CONCLUSIONS

If pain specialty training is going to meet the needs of prospective residents, patients, and society, we should do more to attract women and neurology and psychiatry residents. We should include more opportunities for research and the flexibility to educate trainees who may not pursue a procedural practice.

Has a critical mass of women resulted in gender equity in gynecologic surgery?

Gender equity in medicine and surgery has recently received widespread attention. Unlike surgical specialties that remain predominantly male, the majority of obstetrician-gynecologists have been women for nearly a decade, and women have composed the majority of trainees since the 1990s. Despite a critical mass of women, biases related to gender persist in the field. Professional and behavioral expectations of men and women gynecologists remain different for patients and workplace colleagues. Gender discrimination and sexual harassment are still experienced at high rates by both trainees and obstetrician-gynecologists in practice. In addition, in other surgical fields, women gynecologic surgeons face a gender wage gap that is unexplained by differences in experience, hours worked, or subspecialty training. Academic advancement and the attainment of leadership positions remain a challenge for many women. Policies related to pregnancy and parenting may disproportionately affect the careers of women gynecologists. This article presents peer-reviewed evidence relevant to gender equity in the workplace and suggests proactive interventions to ensure diversity and inclusion for gynecologic surgeons.

'Too male, too pale, too stale': a qualitative exploration of student experiences of gender bias within medical education

OBJECTIVE

To explore medical student perceptions and experiences of gender bias within medical education.

SETTING

Gender bias-'prejudiced actions or thoughts based on the perception that women are not equal to men'-is a widespread issue. Within medicine, the pay gap, under-representation of women in senior roles and sexual harassment are among the most concerning issues demonstrating its presence and impact. While research investigating experiences of clinicians is gaining traction, investigation of medical students' experiences is lacking. This qualitative study analyses medical students' experiences of gender bias within their education to discern any patterns to this bias. Illuminating the current state of medical education gender bias will hopefully highlight areas in which student experience could be improved. Constructivist thematic analysis was used to analyse data, informed by William's patterns of gender bias, intersectional feminism and communities of practice theory.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty-two medical students from multiple UK medical schools participated in individual interviews. Nine faculty members were also interviewed to triangulate data.

RESULTS

Gender bias has an overt presence during medical student education, manifesting in line with William's patterns of bias, impacting career aspirations. Physical environments serve to manifest organisational values, sending implicit messages regarding who is most welcome-currently, this imagery remains 'too male, too pale…too stale'. Existing gender initiatives require careful scrutiny, as this work identifies the superficial application of positive action, and a failure to affect meaningful change.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite progress having been made regarding overt gender discrimination, implicit bias persists, with existing positive action inadequate in promoting the advancement of women. Institutions should mandate participation in implicit bias education programmes for all staff and must strive to revise the imagery within physical environments to better represent society. Gender initiatives, like Athena Scientific Women's Academic Network, also require large-scale evaluation regarding their impact, which this work found to be lacking.

Student Perceptions of M.D.-Ph.D. Programs: A Qualitative Identification of Barriers Facing Prospective M.D.-Ph.D. Applicants

Phenomenon: Despite a high degree of interest in research among matriculating M.D. students, very few apply to combined M.D.-Ph.D. training programs. Even fewer of those applicants are female, leading to a gender disparity among M.D.-Ph.D. trainees. We used a qualitative approach to understand why students choose not to apply or matriculate to M.D.-Ph.D. programs. Approach: We recruited recently matriculated medical students at a private research university with a self-reported interest in academic medicine and biomedical research to participate in focus groups, in which students discussed their career and life goals, general knowledge and sources of information for M.D.-Ph.D. programs, perceived benefits and downsides, and barriers to applying to such programs. Findings: Twenty-two students participated in focus groups. Participants desired careers combining clinical work, research, and teaching. Students had knowledge of the structure and goals of M.D.-Ph.D. training and received information about dual-degree programs from research mentors, the Internet, and peers. Tuition remission and increased grant access were cited as benefits of M.D.-Ph.D. programs, whereas duration, perceived excessive research training, and early commitment were downsides. Perceived competitiveness, misconceptions about training, a lack of M.D.-Ph.D. program-specific advising, discouragement from applying, and duration of training all served as barriers preventing students from pursuing dual-degree training. Insights: Through this qualitative study, we identified perceptions and misconceptions that recent medical school applicants have about M.D.-Ph.D. programs. These findings suggest targetable barriers to increase applications from interested students, such as improving awareness of programs, increased accessibility of advising and resources, and addressing concerns over training length, with the goal of improving training access for aspiring physician-scientists.

Impact of gender on the career development of female traditional Korean medicine doctors: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine the impact of gender and expected gender roles on the career development of young female traditional Korean medicine (KM) doctors.

DESIGN

We conducted semistructured interviews to examine the experiences of study subjects regarding early career choices, employment, job performance and career moves, as well as future career aspirations, from the perspective of gender. The transcription was analysed using the Strauss and Corbin constant comparative analysis method.

SETTING

The interview was conducted at a quiet and comfortable place selected by the participants in South Korea.

PARTICIPANTS

Ten female KM doctors in their 30s participated in the study.

RESULTS

This study reveals that, initially, the participating female KM doctors were unaware of their gender affecting career decisions. However, after graduation and during employment, female doctors experienced direct discrimination or gender segregation while selecting areas of treatment and specialty; they found that they were preferred to work in paediatrics and dermatology departments than in departments treating musculoskeletal health problems. Furthermore, after entering the workforce, female KM doctors found that their gender significantly affects patient-doctor relationships and life events, such as pregnancy and childbirth require temporary career breaks. In addition, female KM doctors assumed stereotypical gender roles both in the workplace and at home, as well as becoming the main nurturer of their children.

CONCLUSION

Gender and stereotyped gender roles affect the overall career planning, career moves and even patient-doctor relationships of female KM doctors. Female doctors were also more likely to experience specific gender roles in the workplace and at home, including both childbirth and childrearing.