An integrated vascular surgery residency program would increase interest among Saudi medical students in a career in vascular surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Considering the absence of integrated vascular surgery residency programs in Saudi Arabia, and the need for planning training pathways, we aim to identify how many medical students are interested in vascular surgery, and the factors affecting students' opinions on pursuing vascular surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online questionnaire that was distributed to medical students nationwide via social media and email. Data were collected from 13 February 2022 to 1 March 2022. RESULTS: A total of 408 students participated. Among them, 152 students were interested in general surgery, of which 103 were considering vascular surgery as a possible future fellowship. However, only 29 out of 408 (7.1%) students picked vascular surgery as their 1st choice. The main motivating factors for students to pursue vascular surgery as a career were: an interest in vascular cases (cardiovascular science), the use of emerging technologies, and the endovascular capabilities of vascular surgeons. The negative factors were simply a preference for another specialty, followed by a lack of experience in vascular surgery. CONCLUSION: This study reveals that only 7.1% of students consider vascular surgery their first choice. Both the lack of vascular surgeons and students' experience in vascular surgery affected awareness levels. Interaction with vascular surgeons through virtual rotations for under-served medical schools and the introduction of vascular sciences within the cardiology blocks during basic science years are recommended strategies.
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 | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".