Search

Introduction: Due to the lack of a theoretically embedded overview of the recent literature on medical career decision-making, this study provides an outline of these dynamics. Since differences in educational routes to the medical degree likely affect career choice dynamics, this study focuses on medical career decision-making in educational systems with a Western European curriculum structure. Methods: A systematic search of electronic databases (Medline, Embase) was conducted from January 2008 to November 2014. A panel of seven independent reviewers performed the data extraction, quality assessment and data synthesis using the Bland–Meurer model of medical specialty choice as a reference. Results: Fifty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria for the review. Factors associated with specialty preference or career choice can be classified in five main categories: (1) medical school characteristics (e.g., curriculum structure), (2) student characteristics (e.g., age, personality), (3) student values (e.g., personal preference), (4) career needs to be satisfied (e.g., expected income, status, and work–life balance), and (5) perception of specialty characteristics (e.g., extracurricular or curricular experiences). Especially career needs and perceptions of specialty characteristics are often associated with medical career decision-making. Conclusion: Our results support that medical career decisions are formed by a matching of perceptions of specialty characteristics with personal needs. However, the process of medical career decision-making is not yet fully understood. Besides identifying possible predictors, future research should focus on detecting interrelations between hypothesized predictors and identify the determinants and interrelations at the various stages of the medical career decision-making process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Medical students develop interest in a specialty career during medical school based on knowledge and clinical experience of different specialties. How valid this knowledge is and how this knowledge relates to the development of preference for a specialty is not known. We studied their "subjective" knowledge of a specialty (students' reported knowledge) with "objective" knowledge of it (students actual knowledge as compared to reports of specialists) and their preference for this specialty at different stages of education, and used youth health care as a case study. Methods: Students from all years in two medical schools (N = 2928) were asked to complete a written questionnaire including (a) a statement of their knowledge of youth health care (YHC) ("subjective knowledge"), (b) their preference for a YHC career and (c) a list of 47 characteristics of medical practice with the request to rate their applicability to YHC. A second questionnaire containing the same 47 characteristics were presented to 20 practicing youth health physicians with the request to rate the applicability to their own profession. This profile was compared to the profiles generated by individual student's answers, resulting in what we called "objective knowledge." Results: Correlation studies showed that "subjective knowledge" was not related to "objective knowledge" of the YHC profession (r = 0.05), but significantly to career preference for this field (r = 0.29, P < 0.01). Preference for a YHC career hardly correlated with objective knowledge about this profession (r = 0.11, P < 0.05). Students with YHC clerkships showed no better "objective knowledge" about the profession than students without such experience. Conclusion: Career preference aren't always related to prior experiences, or to actual knowledge of the area. This study shows how careful we should be to trust students' opinions and preferences about specialties; they probably need much guidance in career choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Teaching opportunities and teacher courses for medical students are increasingly offered by medical schools but little has been investigated about their long-term effect. The aim of our study was to investigate the long-term career effect of an intensive elective teaching experience for final year medical students., Methods: We approached UMC Utrecht medical graduates who had taken a final year, 6‑week full time student teaching rotation (STR) elective, 6 to 9 years after graduation, with an online survey to ask about their educational activities and obtained teaching certificates, their current roles related to education, and their appreciation of the rotation, even if this was a long time ago. In addition, we surveyed control groups of students who had not taken the STR, divided into those who had expressed interest in the STR but had not been placed and those who had not expressed such interest., Results: We received responses from 50 STR graduates and 88 non-STR graduates (11 with interest and 77 without interest in the STR). STR graduates were more educationally active, had obtained more university teaching certificates and were more enthusiastic teachers. However, we could not exclude confounding, caused by a general interest in education even before the STR., Conclusions: Our findings indicate a high appreciation of the student teaching rotation and a likely but not proven long-term association between STR participation and building an educational career., Competing Interests: Conflict of interestThere was no support in the form of grants for this study. A.T. Kloek, A.C.M. van Zijl and O.T.J. ten Cate declare that they have no competing interest.Ethical standardsEthical approval was received from the Ethical Review Board of the Netherlands Association for Medical Education. The anonymity of participants is guaranteed and informed consent for analysis and publication of results is obtained from all participants.

The aim of the present study was to investigate whether basic scientists and physicians agree on the required depth of biomedical knowledge of medical students at graduation. A selection of basic science and clinical teachers rated the relevance of biomedical topics for students at graduation, illustrated by 80 example items. The items were derived from ten organ systems and designed at four levels: clinical, organ, cellular and molecular. Respondents were asked to identify for each item to what extent recently graduated medical students should have knowledge about it. In addition, they were asked to indicate whether the content of the item should be included in the medical curriculum. Analysis showed that basic scientists and physicians do not diverge at the clinical level. At the organ, cellular and molecular levels however, basic scientists judge that medical students should have more active knowledge. As expected, basic scientists also indicate that more deep level content should be included. Explanations for this phenomenon will be discussed.