Dataset Information

Discrimination in an "equal country"-a survey amongst Swedish final-year medical students.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Discrimination due to gender and ethnicity has been found to be widespread in medicine and healthcare. Swedish and European legislation list seven discrimination grounds (age, sex, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, non-binary gender identity, and disability) which may intersect with each other; yet these have only been sparsely researched. The aim of this study was to assess the extent of discrimination, based on these seven discrimination grounds, amongst final-year medical students in Sweden.

Methods

A web-based survey, based on the CHERRIES-checklist, was disseminated to course coordinators and program directors in charge of final year medical students at all seven medical schools in Sweden. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression. Free-text answers were analyzed thematically using the "Master Suppression techniques" conceptual framework.

Results

Of the 1298 medical students contacted, 247 (19%) took part in the survey. Almost half (n = 103, 42%) had experienced some form of discrimination, and this difference was statistically significant by gender (p = 0.012), self-perceived ethnicity (p < 0.001), country of birth other than Scandinavia (p < 0.001) and visible religious signs (p = 0.037). The most common type of discrimination was gender-based (in 83% of students who had experienced discrimination), followed by age (48%), and ethnicity (42%). In the logistic regression, women/non-binary gender (p = 0.001, OR 2.44 [95% CI 1.41-4.22]), country of birth not in Scandinavia (p < 0.001, OR 8.05 [2.69-24.03]), non-Caucasian ethnicity (p = 0.04, OR 2.70 [1.39-5.27]), and disability (p = 0.02, OR 13.8 [1.58-12040]) were independently associated with discrimination. Half of those who had experienced religion-based discrimination and nearly one-third of victims of ethnicity-based discrimination reported "large" or "extreme" impact of this. Clinical staff or supervisors were the most common offenders (34%), closely followed by patients and their relatives (30%), with non-Caucasian respondents significantly more likely to experience discrimination by patients (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Discrimination appears to be frequent in medical school, even in one of the world's "most equal countries". Discrimination is most commonly gender- or ethnicity-based, with ethnicity- and religion-based discrimination appearing to have the largest impact. Future research should continue to evaluate discrimination from an intersectional perspective, adapted for local contexts and legislations.

SUBMITTER: Velin L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9238226 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo determine the perspective of final-year medical students on the use of computed tomography (CT) in patients with sepsis.MethodsA total of 207 questionnaires were distributed to final-year medical students at a large university medical center, and 113 returned questionnaires met the criteria for inclusion in the analysis. Questions referred to sepsis guidelines, CT indications, and the use of contrast agents. Control variables included a level of practical experience as a final-year student (trimester of student's practical year) and previous radiological experience. Statistical hypothesis tests such as the Mann-Whitney U test and chi-square test were performed.ResultsThe majority of participating students, 85% (n = 91/107), considered a Systemic Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score ≥ 2 as a diagnostic criterion for sepsis. The presence of ≥ 2 positive systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria was considered relevant for diagnosing sepsis by 34% (n = 34/100). Ninety-nine percent (n = 64/65) of the participants who fully agreed with a SOFA score ≥ 2 being relevant for diagnosing sepsis would also use it as an indication for a CT scan. Seventy-six percent (n = 78/103) of the students rated a known severe allergic reaction to contrast agents as an absolute contraindication for its administration. Ninety-five percent (n = 78/82) considered radiation exposure as problematic in CT examinations, especially in repeat CTs.ConclusionMost final-year medical students were familiar with the sepsis criteria. Still, some referred to outdated diagnostic criteria. Participants saw the ability to plan further patient management based on CT as a major benefit. Most participants were aware of radiation as a risk of CT.Critical relevance statementMore detailed knowledge of CT in septic patients should be implemented in the medical curriculum. Retraining of medical students could help increase student confidence potentially improving patient care.Key points1. Whereas the majority of final-year medical students were familiar with sepsis criteria, some referred to outdated diagnostic criteria. 2. Participants saw the ability to plan further patient management based on CT as a major benefit. 3. Most participants were aware of radiation as a risk of CT.

Project description:BackgroundThe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) global pandemic has resulted in unprecedented public health measures. This has impacted the UK education sector with many universities halting campus-based teaching and examinations. The aim of this study is to identify the impact of COVID-19 on final year medical students' examinations and placements in the United Kingdom (UK) and how it might impact their confidence and preparedness going into their first year of foundation training.MethodsA 10-item online survey was distributed to final year medical students across 33 UK medical schools. The survey was designed by combining dichotomous, multiple choice and likert response scale questions. Participants were asked about the effect that the COVID-19 global pandemic had on final year medical written exams, electives, assistantships and objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs). The survey also explored the student's confidence and preparedness going into their first year of training under these new unprecedented circumstances.ResultsFour hundred forty students from 32 UK medical schools responded. 38.4% (n = 169) of respondents had their final OSCEs cancelled while 43.0% (n = 189) had already completed their final OSCEs before restrictions. 43.0% (n = 189) of assistantship placements were postponed while 77.3% (n = 340) had electives cancelled. The impact of COVID-19 on OSCEs, written examinations and student assistantships significantly affected students' preparedness (respectively p = 0.025, 0.008, 0.0005). In contrast, when measuring confidence, only changes to student assistantships had a significant effect (p = 0.0005). The majority of students feel that measures taken during this pandemic to amend their curricula was necessary. Respondents also agree that assisting in hospitals during the outbreak would be a valuable learning opportunity.ConclusionsThe impact on medical student education has been significant, particularly affecting the transition from student to doctor. This study showed the disruptions to student assistantships had the biggest effect on students' confidence and preparedness. For those willing to assist in hospitals to join the front-line workforce, it is crucial to maintain their wellbeing with safeguards such as proper inductions, support and supervision.

Project description:BackgroundUndergraduate medical education is supposed to equip medical students with basic competences to select any specialty of their choice for postgraduate training. Medical specialties are characterized by a great diversity of their daily work routines and require different sets of competence facets. This study examines the self-assessed competence profiles of final-year undergraduate medical students and their specialty choice for postgraduate training. Students' profiles, who wish to choose anaesthesiology, internal medicine, or paediatrics, are compared with the physicians' competence profiles from these three disciplines.MethodsIn this study, 148 volunteer final-year undergraduate medical students completed the modified requirement-tracking (R-Track) questionnaire for self-assessment of their competence profiles. The R-Track questionnaire contains 63 competence facets assigned to six areas of competence: "Mental abilities", "Sensory abilities", "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities", "Social interactive competences", "Motivation", and "Personality traits". The expression of the different competence facets had to be assessed on a 5-point Likert scale (1: "very low" to 5: "very high"). Additionally, socio-demographic data and the participants' first choice of a medical speciality for postgraduate education were collected. We used analysis of variance (ANOVA) for mean score comparison of subgroups and least significant difference (LSD) tests for post hoc analysis.ResultsThe competence area with the highest rating was "Motivation" (3.70 ± 0.47) while "Psychomotor & multitasking abilities" received the lowest rating (3.34 ± 0.68). Individual facets of competence ranked from "In need of harmony" (4.36 ± 0.72), followed by "Tactfulness" (4.26 ± 0.64), and "Cooperation/Agreeableness" (4.24 ± 0.53) to "Risk orientation" (2.90 ± 0.92), "Mathematical reasoning" (2.87 ± 1.25), and "Sanctioning" (2.26 ± 0.93). The students' competence profiles showed 100 % congruence with physicians' competence profiles of the postgraduate specialty of their choice for internal medicine, 33.3 % for paediatrics, and 0 % for anaesthesiology.ConclusionsUndergraduate medical students could define their competence profiles with the modified R-Track questionnaire and compare them with the profile of their desired specialty for postgraduate training to discover possible learning gaps or to detect good specialty matches. A combination of students' competence self-assessment with an external assessment of students' facets of competence could provide curricular planners with useful information how to design learning opportunities for specific facets of competence.