Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 Mar 7;9(3):e022097.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-022097.

Factors influencing subspecialty choice among medical students: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yahan Yang  1   2 , Jiawei Li  3 , Xiaohang Wu  1 , Jinghui Wang  1 , Wangting Li  1 , Yi Zhu  4   5 , Chuan Chen  4   6 , Haotian Lin  7
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Factors influencing subspecialty choice among medical students: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yahan Yang et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Objective: To characterise the contributing factors that affect medical students' subspecialty choice and to estimate the extent of influence of individual factors on the students' decision-making process.

Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods: A systematic search of the Cochrane Library, ERIC, Web of Science, CNKI and PubMed databases was conducted for studies published between January 1977 and June 2018. Information concerning study characteristics, influential factors and the extent of their influence (EOI) was extracted independently by two trained investigators. EOI is the percentage level that describes how much each of the factors influenced students' choice of subspecialty. The recruited medical students include students in medical school, internship, residency training and fellowship, who are about to or have just made a specialty choice. The estimates were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis model due to the between-study heterogeneity.

Results: Data were extracted from 75 studies (882 209 individuals). Overall, the factors influencing medical students' choice of subspecialty training mainly included academic interests (75.29%), competencies (55.15%), controllable lifestyles or flexible work schedules (53.00%), patient service orientation (50.04%), medical teachers or mentors (46.93%), career opportunities (44.00%), workload or working hours (37.99%), income (34.70%), length of training (32.30%), prestige (31.17%), advice from others (28.24%) and student debt (15.33%), with significant between-study heterogeneity (p<0.0001). Subgroup analyses revealed that the EOI of academic interests was higher in developed countries than that in developing countries (79.66% [95% CI 70.73% to 86.39%] vs 60.41% [95% CI 43.44% to 75.19%]; Q=3.51, p=0.02). The EOI value of prestige was lower in developed countries than that in developing countries (23.96% [95% CI 19.20% to 29.47%] vs 47.65% [95% CI 34.41% to 61.24%]; Q=4.71, p=0.01).

Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis provided a quantitative evaluation of the top 12 influencing factors associated with medical students' choice of subspecialty. Our findings provide the basis for the development of specific, effective strategies to optimise the distribution of physicians among different departments by modifying these influencing factors.

Keywords: career choice; medical students; meta-analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Bar graph of the meta-analyses of the factors influencing medical students’ choice of subspecialty stratified by region.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Bar graph of the meta-analyses of the factors influencing medical students’ choice of subspecialty stratified by survey year.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Zurn P, Dal Poz MR, Stilwell B, et al. . Imbalance in the health workforce. Hum Resour Health 2004;2:13 10.1186/1478-4491-2-13 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Diallo K, Zurn P, Gupta N, et al. . Monitoring and evaluation of human resources for health: an international perspective. Hum Resour Health 2003;1:3 10.1186/1478-4491-1-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Anderson GF, Hussey PS. Population aging: a comparison among industrialized countries. Health Aff 2000;19:191–203. 10.1377/hlthaff.19.3.191 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hobbs FDR, Bankhead C, Mukhtar T, et al. . Clinical workload in UK primary care: a retrospective analysis of 100 million consultations in England, 2007-14. Lancet 2016;387:2323–30. 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00620-6 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Reeve J, Blakeman T, Freeman GK, et al. . Generalist solutions to complex problems: generating practice-based evidence--the example of managing multi-morbidity. BMC Fam Pract 2013;14:112 10.1186/1471-2296-14-112 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources