Where Do International Medical Graduates Matriculate for Internal Medicine Training? A National Longitudinal Study.

INTRODUCTION: In 2020, roughly 25% of applicants who matched into internal medicine (IM) residencies were international medical graduates (IMGs). We examine 12-year trends in distribution of IMGs among IM training programs and explore differences in program perceptions towards IMG recruitment. METHODS: Since 2007, Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine Annual Surveys have collected data about trainees by medical school graduate type. Sixteen additional questions regarding perceptions of IMGs were included in the 2017 spring survey. RESULTS: The 2017 survey response rate was 63.3% (236/373) and ranged from 61.9 to 70.2% for the 2007-2019 Annual Surveys. During that 12-year period, 55-70% of community programs' and 22-30% of university programs' PGY1 positions were filled by IMGs. In 2017, 45% of community programs' and 15% of university programs' interview and ranking positions were allocated to IMGs. Departmental pressure (university 45.6% [95% CI 43.7-47.5]; community 28.2% [95% CI 26.6-29.7]; p = 0.007), institutional priority (university 64.0% [95% CI 62.1-66.0]; community 41% [95% CI 36.9-44.6]; p = 0.001), and reputational concerns (university 52.8% [95% CI 50.0-55.6]; community 38.5% [95% CI 36.0-40.9]; p = 0.045) were cited as factors influencing recruitment of IMGs. CONCLUSION: Our study was limited to exploring program factors in residency recruitment and did not assess applicant preferences. There is a large, longstanding difference in the recruitment of IMGs to US community-based and university residencies, beginning during the interview and ranking process. Further research in disparities in IMG recruitment is needed, including exploring pressures, preferences, and potential biases associated with the recruitment of IMGs.

Separate but Equal? The Sorting of USMDs and Non-USMDs in Internal Medicine Residency Programs.

BACKGROUND: The US internal medicine workforce relies on international and osteopathic medical graduates to fill gaps in residency. Little is known about the distribution and impact of IMGs, DOs, and USMDs concentrating in different types of IM programs. OBJECTIVE: Determining the extent to which USMDs, DOs, and IMGs concentrate in different types of IM programs and comparing Board pass rates by program concentration. DESIGN, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS: This survey study used data from the AMA's FREIDA database for 476 non-military IM programs in 2017-2018, and 2016-2018 ABIM exam pass rates for 388 accredited programs. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes were (1) program concentration based on percentage of residents who were USMDs, IMGs, and DOs in 2017-2018 and (2) 2016-2018 program ABIM pass rates as proxies for program quality. Key independent variables were hospital type (community-based, community-based university-affiliated, or university-based) when program concentration was the outcome, and program concentration when Board pass rates were the outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of programs were "USMD-dominated," 17% were "DO-dominated," 42% were "IMG dominated," and 16% were "integrated." The chances that a university hospital was USMD-dominated were 32 percentage points higher than that for a community hospital (AME = 0.32, baseline probability = 0.11, 95% CI, 0.17-0.46, P < .001). USMD-dominated programs also had significantly higher pass rates by 4.0 percentage points (AME = 0.04, baseline proportion = 0.90, 95% CI, 0.02-0.06, P < .001) than integrated programs, while DO-dominated programs had significantly lower pass rates (AME = - 0.1, baseline proportion = 0.90, 95% CI, - 0.15 to - 0.04, P < .001). CONCLUSION: USMDs and non-USMDs systematically cluster in certain types of residency programs and their training may not be equal, as measured by board pass rates.

Preliminary Validity Evidence for a Milestones-Based Rating Scale for Chart-Stimulated Recall.

BACKGROUND: Minimally anchored Standard Rating Scales (SRSs), which are widely used in medical education, are hampered by suboptimal interrater reliability. Expert-derived frameworks, such as the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones, may be helpful in defining level-specific anchors to use on rating scales. OBJECTIVE: We examined validity evidence for a Milestones-Based Rating Scale (MBRS) for scoring chart-stimulated recall (CSR). METHODS: Two 11-item scoring forms with either an MBRS or SRS were developed. Items and anchors for the MBRS were adapted from the ACGME Internal Medicine Milestones. Six CSR standardized videos were developed. Clinical faculty scored videos using either the MBRS or SRS and following a randomized crossover design. Reliability of the MBRS versus the SRS was compared using intraclass correlation. RESULTS: Twenty-two faculty were recruited for instrument testing. Some participants did not complete scoring, leaving a response rate of 15 faculty (7 in the MBRS group and 8 in the SRS group). A total of 529 ratings (number of items × number of scores) using SRSs and 540 using MBRSs were available. Percent agreement was higher for MBRSs for only 2 of 11 items-use of consultants (92 versus 75, P = .019) and unique characteristics of patients (96 versus 79, P = .011)-and the overall score (89 versus 82, P < .001). Interrater agreement was 0.61 for MBRSs and 0.51 for SRSs. CONCLUSIONS: Adding milestones to our rating form resulted in significant, but not substantial, improvement in intraclass correlation coefficient. Improvement was inconsistent across items.

Role Models' Influence on Specialty Choice for Residency Training: A National Longitudinal Study.

BACKGROUND: Role models in medical school may influence students' residency specialty choice. OBJECTIVE: We examined whether medical students who reported clinical exposure to a role model during medical school would have an increased likelihood of selecting the role model's specialty for their residencies. METHODS: We conducted a 5-year prospective, national longitudinal study (2011-2016) of medical students from 24 US allopathic medical schools, starting from the middle of their third year. The primary outcome measure was type of residency specialty choice 4 years after graduation. Main predictors were the clinical specialty of a student's most admired physician and the relative importance of 7 potentially influential factors for specialty choice in the fourth year of medical school. RESULTS: From 919 eligible participants, 564 (61%) responded to the first survey; 474 of the respondents (84%) completed the follow-up survey. We excluded 29 participants who were not in their fourth year by the time of the follow-up survey. Of the follow-up respondents, 427 (96%) had specialty data 4 years after graduation. In our multivariate models, exposure to an admired generalist physician prior to medical school (odds ratio [OR] = 2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-4.73) and during medical school (OR = 2.62, 95% CI 1.69-4.05) had the strongest odds with respect to training in a generalist residency 4 years after graduation. Role model exposure also predicted specialty choice among those training in surgical and radiology, ophthalmology, anesthesiology, and dermatology (ROAD) specialties. CONCLUSIONS: Personal exposure to role models in medical school is an important predictor of residency training in that role model's specialty.

Awareness of Bullying in Residency: Results of a National Survey of Internal Medicine Program Directors.

BACKGROUND: Bullying of medical trainees is believed to occur more frequently in medical education than once thought. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a survey to understand internal medicine program director (PD) perspectives and awareness about bullying in their residency programs. METHODS: The 2015 Association of Program Directors in Internal Medicine (APDIM) annual survey was e-mailed to 368 of 396 PDs with APDIM membership, representing 93% of internal medicine residency programs. Questions about bullying were embedded within the survey. Bivariate analyses were performed on PD and program characteristics. RESULTS: Of a total of 368 PD APDIM members, 227 PDs (62%) responded to the survey. Less than one-third of respondents (71 of 227, 31%) reported being aware of bullying in their residency programs during the previous year. There were no significant differences in program or PD characteristics between respondents who reported bullying in their programs and those who did not (gender, tenure as PD, geographic location, or specialty, all P > .05). Those who acknowledged bullying in their program were more likely to agree it was a problem in graduate medical education (P < .0001), and it had a significant negative impact on the learning environment (P < .0001). The majority of reported events entailed verbal disparagements, directed toward interns and women, and involved attending physicians, other residents, and nurses. CONCLUSIONS: This national survey of internal medicine PDs reveals that a minority of PDs acknowledged recent bullying in their training programs, and reportedly saw it as a problem in the learning environment.

Geriatrics Curriculum Needs Assessment for Dermatology Residency Programs.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric patients account for a growing proportion of dermatology clinic visits. Although their biopsychosocial needs differ from those of younger adults, there are no geriatrics training requirements for dermatology residency programs. OBJECTIVE: This study explored the state of geriatrics education in dermatology programs in 2016. METHODS: This constructivist study employed cross-sectional, mixed-methods analysis with triangulation of semistructured interviews, surveys, and commonly used curricular materials. We used purposive sampling of 5 US academic allopathic dermatology programs of different sizes, geographic locations, and institutional resources. Participants were interviewed about informal curricula, barriers, and suggestions for improving geriatrics education, and they also completed a survey about the geriatrics topics that should be taught. The constant comparative method with grounded theory was used for qualitative analysis. We identified formal geriatrics curricular content by electronically searching and counting relevant key texts. RESULTS: Fourteen of 17 participants (82%) agreed to be interviewed, and 10 of 14 (71%) responded to the survey. Themes of what should be taught included diagnosing and managing skin diseases common in older adults, holistic treatment, cosmetic dermatology, benign skin aging, and the basic science of aging. Topics currently covered that could be expanded included communication, systems-based challenges, ethical issues, safe prescribing, quality improvement, and elder abuse. Cosmetic dermatology was the most commonly taught formal geriatrics curricular topic. CONCLUSIONS: There were discrepancies among topics participants felt were important to teach about geriatric dermatology and curricular coverage of these areas. We identified challenges for expanding geriatrics curricula and potential solutions.

Surveys of Health Professions Trainees: Prevalence, Response Rates, and Predictive Factors to Guide Researchers.

PURPOSE: To establish a baseline overall response rate for surveys of health professions trainees, determine strategies associated with improved response rates, and evaluate for the presence of nonresponse bias. METHOD: The authors performed a comprehensive analysis of all articles published in Academic Medicine, Medical Education, and Advances in Health Sciences Education in 2013, recording response rates. Additionally, they reviewed nonresponse bias analyses and factors suggested in other fields to affect response rate including survey delivery method, prenotification, and incentives. RESULTS: The search yielded 732 total articles; of these, 356 were research articles, and of these, 185 (52.0%) used at least one survey. Of these, 66 articles (35.6%) met inclusion criteria and yielded 73 unique surveys. Of the 73 surveys used, investigators reported a response rate for 63.0% of them; response rates ranged from 26.6% to 100%, mean (standard deviation) 71.3% (19.5%). Investigators reported using incentives for only 16.4% of the 73 surveys. The only survey methodology factor significantly associated with response rate was single- vs. multi-institutional surveys (respectively, 74.6% [21.2%] vs. 62.0% [12.8%], P = .022). Notably, statistical power for all analyses was limited. No articles evaluated for nonresponse bias. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately half of the articles evaluated used a survey as part of their methods. Limited data are available to establish a baseline response rate among health professions trainees and inform researchers which strategies are associated with higher response rates. Journals publishing survey-based health professions education research should improve reporting of response rate, nonresponse bias, and other survey factors.

Medical Students' Perspectives on Careers in Hospital Medicine: A National Study.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Purpose: Concerns over burnout and other factors may influence whether students pursue hospital medicine as a career. We investigate whether there are certain predictive factors that ultimately play a role in medical students' career interest in hospital medicine. Methods: In January 2011, 960 third-year medical students from 24 U.S. allopathic medical schools were surveyed at baseline, and six to nine months later when they became fourth-years at follow-up. Hospitalist-oriented students were categorized as those students who indicated interest in the specialties of family medicine, internal medicine, or pediatrics, and who indicated that they were "very likely" or "somewhat likely" to become a hospitalist. Respondents were also asked to respond to a list of seven factors that potentially influenced their specialty choice. Results: Adjusted response rate for the fourth-year survey was 50% (n=463/919). Medical students considering hospitalist careers were more likely to report that perceived burnout between various specialties played an important influential role in their specialty decision-making (49.7% [42.2-57.2%], vs. non-hospitalists 39.9% [32.8-47.0%], P=0.03). Conclusions: Given that students are reporting burnout as a factor in their decision-making in favor of hospitalist careers, further studies are needed to explore what aspects of a hospitalist career are appealing to students.

Barriers and Facilitators to Effective Feedback: A Qualitative Analysis of Data From Multispecialty Resident Focus Groups.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of feedback, the literature suggests that there is inadequate feedback in graduate medical education. OBJECTIVE: We explored barriers and facilitators that residents in anesthesiology, emergency medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, and surgery experience with giving and receiving feedback during their clinical training. METHODS: Residents from 3 geographically diverse teaching institutions were recruited to participate in focus groups in 2012. Open-ended questions prompted residents to describe their experiences with giving and receiving feedback, and discuss facilitators and barriers. Data were transcribed and analyzed using the constant comparative method associated with a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: A total of 19 residents participated in 1 of 3 focus groups. Five major themes related to feedback were identified: teacher factors, learner factors, feedback process, feedback content, and educational context. Unapproachable attendings, time pressures due to clinical work, and discomfort with giving negative feedback were cited as major barriers in the feedback process. Learner engagement in the process was a major facilitator in the feedback process. CONCLUSIONS: Residents provided insights for improving the feedback process based on their dual roles as teachers and learners. Time pressures in the learning environment may be mitigated by efforts to improve the quality of teacher-learner relationships. Forms for collecting written feedback should be augmented by faculty development to ensure meaningful use. Efforts to improve residents' comfort with giving feedback and encouraging learners to engage in the feedback process may foster an environment conducive to increasing feedback.

Alliance for clinical education perspective paper: recommendations for redesigning the "final year" of medical school.

BACKGROUND: Although medical school typically lasts 4 years, little attention has been devoted to the structure of the educational experience that takes place during the final year of medical school. SUMMARY: In this perspectives paper, we outline goals for the 4th year of medical school to facilitate a transition from undergraduate to graduate medical education. We provide recommendations for capstone courses, subinternship rotations, and specialty-specific schedules, and we conclude with recommendations to medical students and medical schools for how to use the recommendations contained in this document. CONCLUSIONS: We provide an overview of general competencies and specialty specific recommendations to serve as a foundation for medical schools to develop robust 4th-year curricula and for medical students to plan their 4th-year schedules.

Lifestyle factors and primary care specialty selection: comparing 2012-2013 graduating and matriculating medical students' thoughts on specialty lifestyle.

PURPOSE: To compare how first-year (MS1) and fourth-year students (MS4) ascribe importance to lifestyle domains and specialty characteristics in specialty selection, and compare students' ratings with their primary care (PC) interest. METHOD: In March 2013, MS4s from 11 U.S. MD-granting medical schools were surveyed. Using a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = not important at all; 5 = extremely important), respondents rated the importance of 5 lifestyle domains and 21 specialty selection characteristics. One-way analysis of variance was used to assess differences by PC interest among MS4s. Using logistic regression, ratings from MS4s were compared with prior analyses of ratings by MS1s who matriculated to the same 11 schools in 2012. RESULTS: The response rate was 57% (965/1,701). MS4s, as compared with MS1s, rated as more important to good lifestyle: time off (4.3 versus 4.0), schedule control (4.2 versus 3.9), and financial compensation (3.4 versus 3.2). More MS4s than MS1s selected "time-off" (262/906 [30%] versus 136/969 [14%]) and "control of work schedule" (169/906 [19%] versus 146/969 [15%]) as the most important lifestyle domains. In both classes, PC interest was associated with higher ratings of working with the underserved and lower ratings of prestige and salary. CONCLUSIONS: In the 2012-2013 academic year, matriculating students and graduating students had similar perceptions of lifestyle and specialty characteristics associated with PC interest. Graduating students placed more importance on schedule control and time off than matriculating students. Specialties should consider addressing a perceived lack of schedule control or inadequate time off to attract students.

Promoting sustainable community service in the 4th year of medical school: a longitudinal service-learning elective.

BACKGROUND: To address the country's most pressing healthcare needs, medical students must choose careers in primary care and commit to working with underserved populations. Involvement in student service organizations has been shown to strengthen leadership, empathy, and commitment to underserved health and may lead students to pursue careers in primary care. DESCRIPTION: In 2010, the University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine developed a novel 1-year longitudinal service-learning elective called SERVE (Service, Education, Reflection, Volunteerism Elective). Students earned elective credit for completing three course requirements: 10 service sessions, monthly reflections, and a service-learning project. EVALUATION: One third of the class enrolled in the course (33/99), 25 students completed the course, and 20 completed the final evaluation. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses of the final evaluations demonstrated high satisfaction with the course, and appreciation of the opportunity to volunteer, teach, and develop service projects. SERVE students reported a strong commitment to continuing community service after graduation, with 100% planning to continue volunteering and 70% strongly agreeing with the statement that they would practice in an underserved community in the future. This commitment was higher than that expressed by the graduating class of 2012 (34%) and higher compared to a national average (30.9%). CONCLUSIONS: SERVE is a unique 1-year course that reengages 4th-year medical students in service to their communities in a structured educational environment. SERVE students report that the course has increased their involvement in the community, supported their growth into a teaching role, and enhanced continuity within student-run free clinics. Future directions include assessing the impact of SERVE students on the experience of preclinical medical students in student-run free clinics; community response to SERVE projects; and the impact of SERVE on volunteerism, primary care specialty choice, and future practice in underserved communities for class participants during their medical careers.

Primary care, the ROAD less traveled: what first-year medical students want in a specialty.

PURPOSE: Medical students are increasingly choosing non-primary-care specialties. Students consider lifestyle in selecting their specialty, but how entering medical students perceive lifestyle is unknown. This study investigates how first-year students value or rate lifestyle domains and specialty-selection characteristics and whether their ratings vary by interest in primary care (PC). METHOD: During the 2012-2013 academic year, the authors conducted a cross-sectional survey of first-year medical students from 11 MD-granting medical schools. Using a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = not important at all; 5 = extremely important), respondents rated the importance of 5 domains of good lifestyle and 21 characteristics related to specialty selection. The authors classified students into five groups by PC interest and assessed differences by PC interest using one-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: Of 1,704 participants, 1,020 responded (60%). The option "type of work I am doing" was the highest-rated lifestyle domain (mean 4.8, standard deviation [SD] 0.6). "Being satisfied with the job" was the highest-rated specialty-selection characteristic (mean 4.7, SD 0.5). "Availability of practice locations in rural areas" was rated lowest (mean 2.0, SD 1.1). As PC interest decreased, the importance of "opportunities to work with underserved populations" also decreased, but importance of "average salary earned" increased (effect sizes of 0.98 and 0.94, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: First-year students valued enjoying work. The importance of financial compensation was inversely associated with interest in PC. Examining the determinants of enjoyable work may inform interventions to help students attain professional fulfillment in PC.

"A good career choice for women": female medical students' mentoring experiences: a multi-institutional qualitative study.

PURPOSE: The career decisions, practice patterns, and approach to patient care of current female students, who make up close to 50% of medical school classes, will have a profound impact on the profession. This study explores the role gender plays in the mentoring experiences of female medical students. METHOD: In 2011, the authors conducted focus groups with 48 third- and fourth-year female medical students at four U.S. medical schools. Using a template organizing style, they derived themes in an iterative process to explore female medical students' mentoring relationships and the impact of gender on those relationships. RESULTS: The authors identified four major themes: (1) Optimal mentoring relationships are highly relational. Students emphasized shared values, trust, and a personal connection in describing ideal mentoring relationships. (2) Relational mentoring is more important than gender concordance. Students identified a desire for access to female mentors but stated that when a mentor and mentee developed a personal connection, the gender of the mentor was less important. (3) Gender-based assumptions and stereotypes affect mentoring relationships. Students described gender-based assumptions and expectations for themselves and their mentors. (4) Gender-based power dynamics influence students' thinking about mentoring. Students stated that they were concerned about how their mentors might perceive their professional decisions because of their gender, which influenced what they disclosed to male mentors and mentors in positions of power. CONCLUSIONS: Gender appears to play a role in female medical students' expectations and experience with mentoring relationships and may influence their decision making around career planning.

Premedical students' exposure to the pharmaceutical industry's marketing practices.

PURPOSE: Physicians' exposure to pharmaceutical industry marketing raises concerns about their ability to make unbiased, evidence-based prescription decisions. This exposure begins early in medical education. The authors examined the frequency and context of such exposures for students before matriculation to medical school. METHOD: The authors distributed two separate but related questionnaires to all 389 students who matriculated at the University of Chicago Pritzker School of Medicine between 2007 and 2010. The survey inquired about interactions with the pharmaceutical industry before entering medical school. Descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to analyze data. RESULTS: Across four years, 282 (72.5%) students responded to the first survey; 219 (56.3%) responded to the follow-up survey. The majority of those (62.1%) had interacted with or were exposed to pharmaceutical marketing before medical school. The most common interactions were accepting a pen (50.2%) and attending a sponsored lunch (37.9%), which occurred most commonly while shadowing (33.6% and 42.2%, respectively). The next most common interactions were receiving a small gift (24.7%) and attending a sponsored dinner (20.6%), which occurred most commonly in "other" contexts, such as through family and while working in a medical setting (48.2% and 48.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of students had interacted with the pharmaceutical industry before medical school. The differences in context indicate that students enter medical school with a heterogeneous set of exposures to pharmaceutical marketing. Medical schools should consider interventions to enhance students' knowledge of the impact of pharmaceutical marketing on physicians' prescribing practices.

Participation in unprofessional behaviors among hospitalists: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Unprofessional behaviors undermine the hospital learning environment and quality of patient care. OBJECTIVE: To quantify perceptions of, and participation in, unprofessional behaviors among hospitalists. DESIGN: Observational survey study. SETTING: Three academic health centers. SUBJECTS: Hospitalists. MEASUREMENTS: Observation, participation in, and perceptions of unprofessional behaviors. RESULTS: Response rate was 76% (77/101). Nearly all behaviors were perceived as unprofessional ("unprofessional" or "somewhat unprofessional" on the Likert scale). Participation in egregious behaviors (ie, falsifying records) was low (<5%). The most frequent behaviors reported were having personal conversations in patient corridors (67.1%), ordering a test as "urgent" to expedite care (62.3%), and making fun of other physicians (40.3%). Four factors accounted for 76% of survey variance: (1) making fun of others; (2) learning environment (eg, texting during conferences); (3) workload management (eg, celebrating a blocked-admission); and (4) time pressure (eg, signing out work early). Hospitalists with less clinical time (<50% full-time equivalents [FTE]) were more likely to report making fun of others (ß = 0.94 [95% CI 0.32-1.56], P = 0.004). Younger hospitalists (ß = 0.87 [95% CI 0.07-1.67], P = 0.034) and those with administrative time (ß = 0.61 [95% CI 0.11-1.10], P = 0.017) were more likely to report participating in workload management behaviors. Hospitalists who work night shifts were more likely to report participating in time-pressure behaviors (ß = 0.67 [95% CI 0.17-1.17], P = 0.010). Workload management and learning environment varied by site. CONCLUSION: While hospitalist participation in unprofessional behaviors is low, job characteristics (clinical, administrative, nights), age, and site were associated with different types of unprofessional behavior that may affect the learning environment and patient care.

Changes in perception of and participation in unprofessional behaviors during internship.

BACKGROUND: Do perceptions of and participation in unprofessional behaviors change during internship? METHOD: Interns at three Chicago medicine residencies anonymously reported participation in unprofessional behaviors before and after internship. On the basis of a prior survey, interns rated 28 unprofessional behaviors from 1 (unprofessional) to 5 (professional). Site-adjusted regression examined changes in participation rates and perception scores. RESULTS: Response rates were 93% (105) before and 88% (99) after internship. Participation in on-call unprofessional behaviors increased ("blocking" admissions [12% versus 41%, P < .001], disparaging the ER [27% versus 45%, P = .005], misrepresenting tests as urgent to expedite care [40% versus 60%; P = .003], and signing out by phone [20% versus 42%, P < .001]). Participation in egregious behaviors (fraud, disrespect, misrepresentation) and perceptions of most behaviors remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Although participation in egregious unprofessional behavior remained unchanged during internship, participation in on-call unprofessional behaviors increased.