To select or be selected - Gendered experiences in clinical training affect medical students' specialty preferences

Emelie Kristoffersson, Saima Diderichsen, Petra Verdonk, Toine Lagro-Janssen, Katarina Hamberg, Jenny Andersson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background: The literature investigating female and male medical students' differing career intentions is extensive. However, medical school experiences and their implications for professional identity formation and specialty choice have attracted less attention. In this study we explore the impact of medical school experiences on students' specialty preferences, investigate gender similarities and differences, and discuss how both might be related to gender segregation in specialty preference. Methods: In a questionnaire, 250 Swedish final-year medical students described experiences that made them interested and uninterested in a specialty. Utilizing a sequential mixed methods design, their responses were analyzed qualitatively to create categories that were compared quantitatively. Results: Similar proportions of women and men became interested in a specialty based on its knowledge area, patient characteristics, and potential for work-life balance. These aspects, however, often became secondary to whether they felt included or excluded in clinical settings. More women than men had been deterred by specialties with excluding, hostile, or sexist workplace climates (W = 44%, M = 16%). In contrast, more men had been discouraged by specialties' knowledge areas (W = 27%, M = 47%). Conclusions: Male and female undergraduates have similar incentives and concerns regarding their career. However, the prevalence of hostility and sexism in the learning environment discourages especially women from some specialties. To reduce gender segregation in specialty choice, energy should be directed towards counteracting hostile workplace climates that explain apparent stereotypical assumptions about career preferences of men and women.
Original languageEnglish
Article number268
JournalBMC Medical Education
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Cite this

Kristoffersson, Emelie ; Diderichsen, Saima ; Verdonk, Petra ; Lagro-Janssen, Toine ; Hamberg, Katarina ; Andersson, Jenny. / To select or be selected - Gendered experiences in clinical training affect medical students' specialty preferences. In: BMC Medical Education. 2018 ; Vol. 18, No. 1.
@article{1aac7a792c0d47059805ca9da5487abb,
title = "To select or be selected - Gendered experiences in clinical training affect medical students' specialty preferences",
abstract = "Background: The literature investigating female and male medical students' differing career intentions is extensive. However, medical school experiences and their implications for professional identity formation and specialty choice have attracted less attention. In this study we explore the impact of medical school experiences on students' specialty preferences, investigate gender similarities and differences, and discuss how both might be related to gender segregation in specialty preference. Methods: In a questionnaire, 250 Swedish final-year medical students described experiences that made them interested and uninterested in a specialty. Utilizing a sequential mixed methods design, their responses were analyzed qualitatively to create categories that were compared quantitatively. Results: Similar proportions of women and men became interested in a specialty based on its knowledge area, patient characteristics, and potential for work-life balance. These aspects, however, often became secondary to whether they felt included or excluded in clinical settings. More women than men had been deterred by specialties with excluding, hostile, or sexist workplace climates (W = 44{\%}, M = 16{\%}). In contrast, more men had been discouraged by specialties' knowledge areas (W = 27{\%}, M = 47{\%}). Conclusions: Male and female undergraduates have similar incentives and concerns regarding their career. However, the prevalence of hostility and sexism in the learning environment discourages especially women from some specialties. To reduce gender segregation in specialty choice, energy should be directed towards counteracting hostile workplace climates that explain apparent stereotypical assumptions about career preferences of men and women.",
author = "Emelie Kristoffersson and Saima Diderichsen and Petra Verdonk and Toine Lagro-Janssen and Katarina Hamberg and Jenny Andersson",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1186/s12909-018-1361-5",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
journal = "BMC Medical Education",
issn = "1472-6920",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

To select or be selected - Gendered experiences in clinical training affect medical students' specialty preferences. / Kristoffersson, Emelie; Diderichsen, Saima; Verdonk, Petra; Lagro-Janssen, Toine; Hamberg, Katarina; Andersson, Jenny.

In: BMC Medical Education, Vol. 18, No. 1, 268, 2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - To select or be selected - Gendered experiences in clinical training affect medical students' specialty preferences

AU - Kristoffersson, Emelie

AU - Diderichsen, Saima

AU - Verdonk, Petra

AU - Lagro-Janssen, Toine

AU - Hamberg, Katarina

AU - Andersson, Jenny

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Background: The literature investigating female and male medical students' differing career intentions is extensive. However, medical school experiences and their implications for professional identity formation and specialty choice have attracted less attention. In this study we explore the impact of medical school experiences on students' specialty preferences, investigate gender similarities and differences, and discuss how both might be related to gender segregation in specialty preference. Methods: In a questionnaire, 250 Swedish final-year medical students described experiences that made them interested and uninterested in a specialty. Utilizing a sequential mixed methods design, their responses were analyzed qualitatively to create categories that were compared quantitatively. Results: Similar proportions of women and men became interested in a specialty based on its knowledge area, patient characteristics, and potential for work-life balance. These aspects, however, often became secondary to whether they felt included or excluded in clinical settings. More women than men had been deterred by specialties with excluding, hostile, or sexist workplace climates (W = 44%, M = 16%). In contrast, more men had been discouraged by specialties' knowledge areas (W = 27%, M = 47%). Conclusions: Male and female undergraduates have similar incentives and concerns regarding their career. However, the prevalence of hostility and sexism in the learning environment discourages especially women from some specialties. To reduce gender segregation in specialty choice, energy should be directed towards counteracting hostile workplace climates that explain apparent stereotypical assumptions about career preferences of men and women.

AB - Background: The literature investigating female and male medical students' differing career intentions is extensive. However, medical school experiences and their implications for professional identity formation and specialty choice have attracted less attention. In this study we explore the impact of medical school experiences on students' specialty preferences, investigate gender similarities and differences, and discuss how both might be related to gender segregation in specialty preference. Methods: In a questionnaire, 250 Swedish final-year medical students described experiences that made them interested and uninterested in a specialty. Utilizing a sequential mixed methods design, their responses were analyzed qualitatively to create categories that were compared quantitatively. Results: Similar proportions of women and men became interested in a specialty based on its knowledge area, patient characteristics, and potential for work-life balance. These aspects, however, often became secondary to whether they felt included or excluded in clinical settings. More women than men had been deterred by specialties with excluding, hostile, or sexist workplace climates (W = 44%, M = 16%). In contrast, more men had been discouraged by specialties' knowledge areas (W = 27%, M = 47%). Conclusions: Male and female undergraduates have similar incentives and concerns regarding their career. However, the prevalence of hostility and sexism in the learning environment discourages especially women from some specialties. To reduce gender segregation in specialty choice, energy should be directed towards counteracting hostile workplace climates that explain apparent stereotypical assumptions about career preferences of men and women.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85056700280&origin=inward

UR - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30453953

U2 - 10.1186/s12909-018-1361-5

DO - 10.1186/s12909-018-1361-5

M3 - Article

VL - 18

JO - BMC Medical Education

JF - BMC Medical Education

SN - 1472-6920

IS - 1

M1 - 268

ER -