Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38073796›Full record

ArticleMedEdPublish (2016)2020

A mixed-approach to investigate what motivates Belgian students to study medicine.

Hélène Givron, Line Fischer, Martin Desseilles

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in MedEdPublish (2016), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Hélène GivronFaculty of Medicine.
Line FischerEducation and Technology Department.
Martin DesseillesFaculty of Medicine.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Aims - Our main objective was to explore the motivations that led our third year Belgian students to study medicine. Method - We used a mixed method as we collected both quantitative and qualitative measures at the same time through online surveys. Chi-Square tests were used to examine differences in motivation between gender of the participants. A thematic content analysis was then conducted on the open-ended question using a qualitative approach. Results and conclusions - The final sample consists of 243 third-year students (87 men and 156 women). Chi-square analyses revealed gender differences in motivations to study medicine. The motivation most often reported by our students in both qualitative and quantitative analyses is "altruistic motivation". The qualitative analysis identified, within this category, sometimes unrealistic beliefs about the practice of medicine, leading to the conclusion that it is necessary to put medical students in contact with the reality of the field as soon as possible. Furthermore, the lack of focus on the relationship with the patient within the formal curriculum and subsequent medical practice could be the cause of a form of disillusionment among these students. We believe that more lessons on relational aspects should be offered to them. Perspectives - Finally, in addition to identifying and classifying the motivations present among medical students, we believe that some perspectives are the analysis of the interactions between these motivations in 1) the determination of the choice of study and 2) the attitudes and behaviours that will result from it.

Indexed as

choice of professional orientation.curriculummedical educationmotivationsundergraduate medical students

Identifiers

PMID38073796
PMCPMC10699379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.