Perceptions of medical school among high school students in southwestern Ontario.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Canadian medical students are more likely to come from urban and high-income areas and to have well-educated, professional parents. Physicians who grew up in rural areas are more likely to serve in rural and lower-income areas. We identify perceptions held by rural high school students regarding the affordability and attainability of a medical education. METHODS: We distributed a survey to high school students who attended the MedQUEST Health Career Exploration Program in southwestern Ontario. The survey assessed socioeconomic background and perceived barriers to a medical education (including affordability as well as encouragement and discouragement from others). RESULTS: Of the 119 attendees, 106 (89.1%) completed the survey. Of the students who were interested in becoming physicians, most expected to fund their medical education through scholarships (56 [69.1%]), parental support (50 [61.7%]) or student employment (45 [55.6%]). However, less than half of all respondents (48 [45.3%]) provided reasonably correct estimates for annual medical tuition fees. If at least 1 parent had a postsecondary education, respondents were less likely to cite affordability as a barrier to attending medical school (p = 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although students interested in obtaining a medical education cited affordability as a potential barrier, many were not aware of the actual cost of attending medical school. We found an association between perceived affordability of medical school and parents' level of education. To define this relation further, research is needed to collect more accurate data on family income. Students may benefit from more information about funding opportunities for medical school.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.029 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".