Medical specialty prestige and lifestyle preferences for medical students
View/ Open
Author(s)
Creed, Peter A
Searle, Judy
Rogers, Mary E
Year published
2010
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
In the context of doctor shortages and mal-distributions in many Western countries, prestige and lifestyle friendliness have emerged as significant factors for medical students when they choose a medical specialty. In this study, we surveyed two samples of Australian medical students and had them rank 19 medical specialties for prestige (N 젵30) and lifestyle friendliness (N 젶44). The prestige rankings were generally consistent with previous ratings by physicians, lay people and advanced medical students, with surgery, internal, and intensive care medicine ranking the highest, and public health, occupational, and non-specialist ...
View more >In the context of doctor shortages and mal-distributions in many Western countries, prestige and lifestyle friendliness have emerged as significant factors for medical students when they choose a medical specialty. In this study, we surveyed two samples of Australian medical students and had them rank 19 medical specialties for prestige (N 젵30) and lifestyle friendliness (N 젶44). The prestige rankings were generally consistent with previous ratings by physicians, lay people and advanced medical students, with surgery, internal, and intensive care medicine ranking the highest, and public health, occupational, and non-specialist hospital medicine ranking lowest. This suggests that medical students have incorporated prevailing prestige perceptions of practicing doctors and the community. Lifestyle rankings were markedly different from prestige rankings, where dermatology, general practice, and public health medicine were ranked the most lifestyle friendly, and surgery, obstetrics/gynaecology and intensive care were ranked least friendly. Student lifestyle rankings differed from physician and author-generated rankings, indicating that student preferences should be considered rather than relying on ratings created by others. Few differences were found for gender or year of study, signifying perceptions of prestige and lifestyle friendliness were consistent across the students sampled. Having access to and understanding these rankings will assist career counsellors to aid student and junior doctor decision-making and aid workforce planners to address gaps in medical specialty health services.
View less >
View more >In the context of doctor shortages and mal-distributions in many Western countries, prestige and lifestyle friendliness have emerged as significant factors for medical students when they choose a medical specialty. In this study, we surveyed two samples of Australian medical students and had them rank 19 medical specialties for prestige (N 젵30) and lifestyle friendliness (N 젶44). The prestige rankings were generally consistent with previous ratings by physicians, lay people and advanced medical students, with surgery, internal, and intensive care medicine ranking the highest, and public health, occupational, and non-specialist hospital medicine ranking lowest. This suggests that medical students have incorporated prevailing prestige perceptions of practicing doctors and the community. Lifestyle rankings were markedly different from prestige rankings, where dermatology, general practice, and public health medicine were ranked the most lifestyle friendly, and surgery, obstetrics/gynaecology and intensive care were ranked least friendly. Student lifestyle rankings differed from physician and author-generated rankings, indicating that student preferences should be considered rather than relying on ratings created by others. Few differences were found for gender or year of study, signifying perceptions of prestige and lifestyle friendliness were consistent across the students sampled. Having access to and understanding these rankings will assist career counsellors to aid student and junior doctor decision-making and aid workforce planners to address gaps in medical specialty health services.
View less >
Journal Title
Social Science & Medicine
Volume
71
Copyright Statement
© 2010 Elsevier. This is the author-manuscript version of this paper. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.
Subject
Biomedical and clinical sciences
Economics
Human society
Health sciences