Psychiatry as a career: A survey of factors affecting students’ interest in Psychiatry as a career
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to determine the characteristics of medical students and graduates interested in choosing psychiatry as a career and the obstacles in choosing this field of medicine. Two private and two public medical institutes were surveyed from June 2007 to August 2007. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to third, fourth and final year students and to medical graduates doing their internship in these four medical institutes. A total of 909 medical students and graduates participated in the study. Seventeen percent of participants responded positively regarding their interest in psychiatry as a career. Significantly higher proportion belonged to private medical institutes (14% vs. 24%, P-value =0.001). There was no significant difference in reporting interest for psychiatry in regard to age, sex, year in medical school and whether or not the participant had done a psychiatry ward rotation. However significantly higher proportion of participants (22%, n=43) were reporting their interest in the field of psychiatry who had done more than a month long psychiatry ward rotation as compared to those participants (14%, n=54) with less than a month or no psychiatry rotation (P-value=0.01). More students were reporting their interest in psychiatry with a family history of psychiatric illness as compared to without family history (24% vs 16%, P-value=0.03). In conclusion, students and graduates with more than a month long rotation in psychiatry, studying in private medical colleges and with a family history of psychiatric illness were more interested in choosing psychiatry as a career.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".