14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Elección de especialidad médica en estudiantes de medicina de la Universidad de Oriente, Ciudad Bolívar, Venezuela Translated title: Specialty choice in medical students of the Universidad de Oriente, Ciudad Bolívar, Venezuela

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introducción: La elección de la especialidad médica es una decisión que marca la vida del estudiante de medicina. Según estudios, existen diferencias entre hombres y mujeres en el momento de decidir sus futuras especialidades. En el presente estudio se analizó la elección de especialidad en estudiantes de medicina de la Universidad de Oriente y su relación con el sexo y la percepción de la calidad de vida ofrecida por cada una. Sujetos y métodos: Se aplicó un cuestionario a 120 estudiantes de pregrado del undécimo semestre de la carrera de medicina en relación con su género, preferencia de futura especialidad médica, y especialidades que considerasen que ofrecieran la mejor y la peor calidad de vida. Resultados: Pediatría (15%), cirugía general (13%) y cirugía plástica (11%) resultaron las más elegidas. Las mujeres prefirieron pediatría (19%) y ginecoobstetricia (13%), mientras que los hombres se inclinaron por cirugía plástica (19%) y cirugía ortopédica (16%). Como representantes de una mejor calidad de vida se eligieron dermatología (19%) y anestesiología (10%); en cuanto a la peor calidad de vida, se seleccionaron cirugía general (17%) y ginecoobstetricia (15%). Conclusiones: Las mujeres prefirieron las especialidades clínicas, mientras que los hombres tuvieron una marcada predilección por las quirúrgicas. La calidad de vida no pareció tener influencia relevante en la elección de especialidad, por lo que debe profundizarse en el estudio de otros factores.

          Translated abstract

          Introduction: The specialty choice is an important decision for medical students, according to studies there are differences between men and women when they decide their future specialties, in the present study was analyzed the specialty choice in medical students in the Universidad de Oriente and its relationship with gender and the perception of quality of life offered by each one. Subjects and methods: Trough a questionnaire, 120 students were surveyed about their gender, preference of medical specialty, and the specialties they think have the best and worst quality of life. Results: Pediatrics (15%), general surgery (13%) and plastic surgery (11%) were the most chosen. Women's preferred pediatrics (19%) and obstetrics-gynecology (13%) meanwhile men's preferred plastic surgery (19%), and orthopedics (16%). As representatives of a better quality of life were chosen dermatology (19%) and anesthesiology(10%), in the case of worst quality of life were general surgery (17%) and obstetrics-gynecology(15%). Conclusions: Women's preferred clinical specialties meanwhile men's had a marked preference on surgical ones. Quality of life doesn't appeared to have a relevant impact in the specialty choice, so it should be deepen in the study of other factors.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Factors associated with medical students' career choices regarding internal medicine.

          Shortfalls in the US physician workforce are anticipated as the population ages and medical students' interest in careers in internal medicine (IM) has declined (particularly general IM, the primary specialty serving older adults). The factors influencing current students' career choices regarding IM are unclear. To describe medical students' career decision making regarding IM and to identify modifiable factors related to this decision making. Web-based cross-sectional survey of 1177 fourth-year medical students (82% response rate) at 11 US medical schools in spring 2007. Demographics, debt, educational experiences, and number who chose or considered IM careers were measured. Factor analysis was performed to assess influences on career chosen. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to assess independent association of variables with IM career choice. Of 1177 respondents, 274 (23.2%) planned careers in IM, including 24 (2.0%) in general IM. Only 228 (19.4%) responded that their core IM clerkship made a career in general IM seem more attractive, whereas 574 (48.8%) responded that it made a career in subspecialty IM more attractive. Three factors influenced career choice regarding IM: educational experiences in IM, the nature of patient care in IM, and lifestyle. Students were more likely to pursue careers in IM if they were male (odds ratio [OR] 1.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-2.56), were attending a private school (OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.26-2.83), were favorably impressed with their educational experience in IM (OR, 4.57; 95% CI, 3.01-6.93), reported favorable feelings about caring for IM patients (OR, 8.72; 95% CI, 6.03-12.62), or reported a favorable impression of internists' lifestyle (OR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.39-2.87). Medical students valued the teaching during IM clerkships but expressed serious reservations about IM as a career. Students who reported more favorable impressions of the patients cared for by internists, the IM practice environment, and internists' lifestyle were more likely to pursue a career in IM.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

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

            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.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Medical Specialty Choice and Related Factors of Brazilian Medical Students and Recent Doctors

              Background Choosing a medical specialty is an important, complex, and not fully understood process. The present study investigated the factors that are related to choosing and rejecting medical specialties in a group of students and recent medical doctors. Methodology and Findings A cross-sectional survey of 1,223 medical students and doctors was performed in Brazil in 2012. A standardized literature-based questionnaire was applied that gathered preferable or rejected specialties, and asked questions about extracurricular experiences and the influence of 14 factors on a Likert-type scale from 0 to 4. Specialties were grouped according to lifestyle categories: controllable and uncontrollable, which were subdivided into primary care, internal medicine, and surgical specialties. Notably, the time period of rejection was usually earlier than the time period of intended choice (p < 0.0001, χ2 = 107.2). The choice mainly occurred during the internship period in medical school (n = 466; 38.7%). An overall large frequency of participation in extracurricular activities was observed (n = 1,184; 95.8%), which were highly associated with the respective medical area. Orthopedic surgery had the highest correlation with participation in specialty-specific organized groups (OR = 59.9, 95% CI = 21.6-166.3) and psychiatry was correlated with participation in research groups (OR = 18.0, 95% CI = 9.0-36.2). With regard to influential factors in controllable lifestyle specialties, “financial reason” (mean score ± standard deviation: 2.8 ± 1.0; median = 3) and “personal time” (3.1 ± 1.3; median = 4) were important factors. In primary care, these factors were less important (1.7 ± 1.3 and 1.7 ± 1.5, respectively; median = 2 for both), and higher scores were observed for “curricular internship” (3.2 ± 1.1, median = 4) and “social commitment” (2.6 ± 1.3, median = 3). Conclusion The present findings provide important insights into developing strategies to stimulate interest in specialties based on the needs of the Brazilian healthcare system.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                fem
                FEM: Revista de la Fundación Educación Médica
                FEM (Ed. impresa)
                Fundación Educación Médica y Viguera Editores, S.L. (Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain )
                2014-9832
                2014-9840
                2021
                : 24
                : 2
                : 91-94
                Affiliations
                [2] Ciudad Bolívar orgnameAsociación Científica de Estudiantes de Medicina de la Universidad de Oriente, Núcleo Bolívar, SOCIEM UDO Bolívar) Venezuela
                [1] Ciudad Bolívar orgnameUniversidad de Oriente orgdiv1Escuela de Ciencias de la Salud Doctor Francisco Virgilio Battistini Casalta Venezuela
                Article
                S2014-98322021000200005 S2014-9832(21)02400200005
                8481aff2-e458-4ff4-9685-c523b6902d4c

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 09 September 2020
                : 04 November 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 17, Pages: 4
                Product

                SciELO Spain

                Categories
                Originales

                Medicine,Sexo,Residencia médica,Posgrado,Medicina,Estudiantes,Calidad de vida,Students,Quality of life,Postgraduate,Medical residency,Gender

                Comments

                Comment on this article