Exploring Medical Students’ Representations of Future Specialties and Parenthood: Protocol for a Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Several factors come into consideration when medical students choose their future specialty. Among these factors, the desire to start a family and planning the best timing for pregnancy may interfere with career advancement in certain specialties. Objective: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first scoping review aimed at understanding medical students' career choice and parental expectations without restriction of the specialty chosen. This protocol describes a scoping review aiming to understand how representations regarding specialties and parenthood influence medical students' career choice., This protocol describes a scoping review aiming to understand how representations regarding specialties and parenthood influence medical students' career choice. Methods: We will search PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, ERIC, and PsycInfo for literature. Additionally, the reference lists of included articles will be screened for further inclusion. Rayyan and Endnote will be used to organize data screening and extraction. The database selection will allow us to extract and analyze data from various disciplines. This diversity will increase our understanding of medical students' career and personal life decisions. This protocol and the upcoming scoping review have been designed following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines to ensure the quality of the searching process, the data screening, and the data extraction. Results: This study will conduct a thematic synthesis of how the concepts of representations and perceptions of parenthood are used by medical students in the selected literature, comparing them to theoretical frameworks to clarify their meanings. We also plan to identify key themes related to parenthood and medical specialty choice when planning a career. As of December 2025, we proceeded to data screening. We anticipate publishing our results in the second quarter of 2026. Conclusions: This scoping review aims to better understand medical students' representations of medical specialties and parenthood, and how these perceptions influence their specialty preferences and career choices. By mapping existing evidence across various disciplines, the review will identify research gaps and provide a foundation for future studies. The findings will offer valuable insights into the challenges of balancing career aspirations and family life, particularly in the context of physician shortages and the growing feminization of the medical profession.
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 | 0.132 | 0.155 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.094 | 0.017 |
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".