MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399461378 · doi:10.1080/10401334.2024.2364265

Exploring Factors Influencing Medical Trainees’ Specialty Choice: Insights from a Nationwide Cross-Sectional Survey in Jordan

2024· article· en· W4399461378 on OpenAlexaff
Osama Aldahamsheh, Sereen Halayqeh, May Alfayyadh, Zina Smadi, Sara Abu Halimeh, Mary Almadani, Wathiq Shatnawi, Sarah Ellouzy, Mohammad Abufaraj

Bibliographic record

VenueTeaching and Learning in Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsVancouver Spine Surgery InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCross-sectional studySpecialtyFamily medicineMedical educationMedicinePsychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phenomenon: Choosing a medical specialty is a critical decision that significantly impacts medical students’ future career. Understanding the factors influencing this decision-making process is important for medical educators, policymakers, and healthcare providers to develop effective strategies that support and guide students in making informed decisions. Approach: We distributed an online self-administered questionnaire to clinical-year medical students (Years 4 to 6) and interns from all medical faculties in Jordan. The questionnaire gathered demographic information, specialty preferences, and factors influencing specialty decision-making. We analyzed the data using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Findings: 1805 participants completed the questionnaire (51.7% women). General surgery was the most preferred specialty among both genders, followed by internal medicine. Women significantly preferred family medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics and gynecology, and dermatology, whereas men significantly preferred urology, orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, general surgery, and internal medicine. The factors that most strongly influenced respondents’ specialty preferences were the specialty’s perceived stress levels and working hours, whereas the least influential factors were the specialty’s perceived prestige and role models in the specialty. Women’s specialty preferences were significantly more influenced by their family than men’s. Men were substantially more influenced by specialties’ perceived action-orientation and stress levels than women. Insights: Gender significantly influences medical trainees’ specialty preferences in Jordan. Women tended to prefer specialties that provided greater work-life balance, such as family medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics and gynecology, and dermatology, while men were more drawn toward competitive and profitable surgical specialties like orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, urology, and general surgery. Additionally, family had a stronger influence on women’s decisions, likely due to cultural and social expectations prioritizing marriage and family for women. Career counseling and mentorship programs are needed to provide guidance, support, and networking opportunities that can help women overcome barriers and biases that may hinder their career advancement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.120
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.127
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.236 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTeaching and Learning in MedicineSame topicDiversity and Career in MedicineFrench-language works237,207