Exploring financial challenges of students and early-career professionals working in the healthcare sector: A scoping review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The global healthcare workforce is facing a substantial shortage and an uneven distribution of qualified professionals, which restricts access to essential healthcare services. This shortage may be mitigated through more effective support of healthcare workers in training. Therefore, an overview of existing economic barriers for this demographic is necessary. OBJECTIVE: To review the existing literature on financial challenges of students and early-career professionals in the healthcare sector. METHODS: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, articles published between January 2008 and February 2024 were identified using PubMed and Scopus. A total of 17,268 articles were screened by reviewing their titles and abstracts followed by a detailed review of full texts with cross-validation. Themes were identified, clustered, and analyzed. RESULTS: This scoping review included 167 articles focusing on the themes debt (36.5%, n=61) and loans (10.2 %, n=17) and their influence on career pathways, the role of employment for career satisfaction, summarizing findings concerning salary (29.9%, n=50), finances (25.1%, n=42), funding (10.8%, n=18), and savings (10.2%, n=17), and obstacles toward a sustainable lifestyle, which included results considering career choice (34.1%, n=57), migration (7.2%, n=12), gender disparity (6.0%, n=10), and working conditions (2.4%, n=4). CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to close the healthcare workforce gap require greater investment in training, compensation, and support for junior healthcare workers. Students and early-career professionals warrant particular attention to build a sustainable, resilient, and reliable healthcare workforce.
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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".