Dataset Information

What reasons do final-year medical students give for choosing the hospitals for their clinical training phases? A quantitative content analysis.

ABSTRACT: Aim: In the final (practical) year (PY), students have the opportunity to become familiar with their potential future place of work. At the same time, university hospitals and teaching hospitals compete to recruit the best junior staff from this pool. The aim of this study is to present students' selection criteria for the location of the final year in detail. Methods: On the formal evaluation of the final year at the Mannheim Medical Faculty, students were asked after each training period which reasons led to the selection of the location. Thirty-one subcategories were formed from the free-text responses, sorted according to their controllability and then grouped into 11 main categories. The Mannheim University Hospital introduced an expense allowance in November 2015. The data from the period before and after its introduction, the reasons given for choosing the location for the compulsory and elective subjects, and the reasons given for choosing a teaching hospital or university hospital were evaluated and compared separately. Results: A total of 1,164 questionnaires were evaluated from the period before the introduction of the expense allowance, and 1,120 questionnaires were evaluated from the period after the introduction. Overall, Proximity (19%), Financial incentives (18%) and Subject (18%) were the most frequently cited reasons. The Financial incentives subcategory was the most frequent in period 1 (32%), but lost relevance in period 2 (6%). In contrast, Recommendation gained in importance (from 8% to 15%). A comparison of the lead categories shows that teaching hospitals benefit more from their public image and university hospitals more from the subjects they offer. Conclusion: Students primarily choose the location for their final year for pragmatic reasons, such as Incentives and Living environment, but the Public image of the hospitals also plays a significant role. The frequency of the reasons given differs between compulsory and elective subjects, as well as between university hospitals and teaching hospitals. The results can help to improve the attractiveness of the location in a targeted manner and to present a specific image to the public.

SUBMITTER: Homberg A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6737269 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What reasons do final-year medical students give for choosing the hospitals for their clinical training phases? A quantitative content analysis.

Homberg Angelika A Narciß Elisabeth E Schüttpelz-Brauns Katrin K

GMS journal for medical education 20190815 4

<b>Aim:</b> In the final (practical) year (PY), students have the opportunity to become familiar with their potential future place of work. At the same time, university hospitals and teaching hospitals compete to recruit the best junior staff from this pool. The aim of this study is to present students' selection criteria for the location of the final year in detail. <b>Methods:</b> On the formal evaluation of the final year at the Mannheim Medical Faculty, students were asked after each trainin ...[more]

PMID: 31544138

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objective: There is a need for young physicians to take a responsible role in clinical teams, comparable to a leadership role. However, today's medical curricula barely consider the development of leadership competencies. Acquisition of leadership skills are currently a by-product of medical education, even though it seems to be a competency relevant for physicians' success. Therefore, an innovative leadership training program for young physicians was developed and validated. Training conceptualisation were based upon findings of critical incidents interviews (N=19) with relevant personnel (e.g. experienced doctors/nurses, residents) and upon evidence-based leadership contents focusing on ethical leadership behaviors. Method: The training consists of four sessions (3-4 hours each) and provided evidence-based lectures of leadership theory and effective leader behaviors, interactive training elements and a simulation-based approach with professional role players focusing on interprofessional collaboration with care staff. Training evaluation was assessed twice after completion of the program (N=37). Assessments included items from validated and approved evaluation instruments regarding diverse learning outcomes (satisfaction/reaction, learning, self-efficacy, and application/transfer) and transfer indicators. Furthermore, training success predictors were assessed based on stepwise regression analysis. In addition, long-term trainings effects and behavioral changes were analysed. Results: Various learning outcomes are achieved (self-reported training satisfaction, usefulness of the content and learning effects) and results show substantial transfer effects of the training contents and a strengthened awareness for the leadership role (e.g. self-confidence, ideas dealing with work-related problems in a role as responsible physician). We identified competence of trainer, training of applied tools, awareness of job expectations, and the opportunity to learn from experiences of other participants as predictors of training success. Additionally, we found long-term training effects and participants reported an increase in specific competencies, relevant for effective interprofessional collaboration (active perspective-taking, communication, conflict management, personal competencies). Conclusion: The training of leadership competencies for young physicians seems feasible to develop constructive influence strategies for a successful interprofessional collaboration in early career stages. The simulation-based approach is beneficial for residents to practice leadership behaviour in realistic job situations.

Project description:BackgroundThough the proportion of women in medical schools has increased, gender disparities among those who pursue research careers still exists. In this study, we seek to better understand the main factors contributing to the existing gender disparities among medical students choosing to pursue careers in medical research.MethodsA secondary cross-sectional cohort analysis of previously published data was conducted using a 70-item survey that was sent to 16,418 medical students at 32 academic medical centers, and was IRB exempt from the need for ethical approval at the University of Illinois at Chicago and the University of Pennsylvania. Data was collected from September 2012 to December 2014. Survey results were analyzed using chi-square tests and Cramer's V to determine gender differences in demographic characteristics (training stage, race/ethnicity, marital status, parental status, financial support, and parental career background), career sector choice, career content choice, specialty choice, foreseeable career obstacles, and perceptions about medical research careers.ResultsFemale respondents were more likely to be enrolled in MD-only programs, while male respondents were more likely to be enrolled in MD/PhD programs. More male students selected academia as their first-choice career sector, while more female respondents selected hospitalist as their first-choice career sector. More female respondents identified patient care and opportunities for community service as their top career selection factors, while more male respondents identified research and teaching as their top career selection factors. Student loan burden, future compensation, and work/life balance were the most reported obstacles to pursuing a career in medical research.ConclusionsThere are many factors from a medical student's perspective that may contribute to the existing gender disparities in pursuing a career in medical research. While much progress has been made in attracting nearly equal numbers of men and women to the field of medicine, active efforts to bridge the gap between men and women in medical research careers are needed.

Project description:BackgroundThe medical specialities chosen by doctors for their careers play an important part in the workforce planning of health-care services. However, there is little theoretical understanding of how different medical specialities are perceived or how choices are made, despite there being much work in general on this topic in occupational psychology, which is influenced by Holland's RIASEC (Realistic-Investigative-Artistic-Social-Enterprising-Conventional) typology of careers, and Gottfredson's model of circumscription and compromise. In this study, we use three large-scale cohorts of medical students to produce maps of medical careers.MethodsInformation on between 24 and 28 specialities was collected in three UK cohorts of medical students (1981, 1986 and 1991 entry), in applicants (1981 and 1986 cohorts, N = 1135 and 2032) or entrants (1991 cohort, N = 2973) and in final-year students (N = 330, 376, and 1437). Mapping used Individual Differences Scaling (INDSCAL) on sub-groups broken down by age and sex. The method was validated in a population sample using a full range of careers, and demonstrating that the RIASEC structure could be extracted.ResultsMedical specialities in each cohort, at application and in the final-year, were well represented by a two-dimensional space. The representations showed a close similarity to Holland's RIASEC typology, with the main orthogonal dimensions appearing similar to Prediger's derived orthogonal dimensions of 'Things-People' and 'Data-Ideas'.ConclusionsThere are close parallels between Holland's general typology of careers, and the structure we have found in medical careers. Medical specialities typical of Holland's six RIASEC categories are Surgery (Realistic), Hospital Medicine (Investigative), Psychiatry (Artistic), Public Health (Social), Administrative Medicine (Enterprising), and Laboratory Medicine (Conventional). The homology between medical careers and RIASEC may mean that the map can be used as the basis for understanding career choice, and for providing career counselling.

Dataset Information

What reasons do final-year medical students give for choosing the hospitals for their clinical training phases? A quantitative content analysis.

Publications

What reasons do final-year medical students give for choosing the hospitals for their clinical training phases? A quantitative content analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets