Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38090998›Full record

ArticleJAMA surgery2024

Medical Students' Perspectives on Family Planning and Impact on Specialty Choice.

Ebernella Shirin Dason, Madalina Maxim, Dionne Gesink, Michelle Yee, Crystal Chan, Nancy N Baxter, Heather Shapiro, Andrea N Simpson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024
    Article
  11. Policies to better support childbearing surgeons.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Ebernella Shirin DasonDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Madalina MaximTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Dionne GesinkDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Michelle YeeDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Crystal ChanDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Nancy N BaxterLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital/Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Heather ShapiroDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Mount Sinai Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Andrea N SimpsonLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael's Hospital/Unity Health Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Physicians are known to delay childbearing compared with nonphysicians and to experience higher rates of age-related pregnancy complications. Delay of childbearing is more pronounced in surgical specialties, and family planning and building goals may influence specialty choice. Objective: To assess medical students' perspectives on the development of family planning goals and the timing of family building within a medical career to elucidate how these perceptions impact their choice of specialty. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study included fourth-year medical students at the University of Toronto Temerty Faculty of Medicine, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and was conducted between May and August 2021. Participants were purposively sampled to maximize diversity of gender and specialty choice. Interviews were conducted via videoconferencing software that were recorded, transcribed verbatim, and verified for accuracy. Thematic analysis was completed independently by 2 researchers and consensus on final themes was reached through discussion among study investigators. Data were analyzed between September and December 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Participants were asked to share their perceptions of personal family planning goals, support currently in place, family planning education in medicine and factors contributing to their choice of specialty and program. Thematic analysis was completed. Results: A total of 34 fourth-year medical students (median [range] age, 26 [24-33] years; 23 females [67.6%]) were interviewed. Four main themes were identified: (1) there is no ideal time to family build in a medical career, (2) family planning is a taboo topic, (3) surgical specialties offer less support for family building, and (4) residents who have children are perceived to place a burden on their colleagues. Medical students considered their family planning while deliberating among specialty choices and their experiences were highly influential in shaping their specialty selection. Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this qualitative study suggest that medical students perceive that family building during training may have unfavorable implications for team dynamics and relationships with colleagues, and these perceptions may affect specialty choice and family planning goals. Integration of family planning discussions and support for family building into medical curricula is needed along with efforts to improve culture by supporting team dynamics and workload when students take parental leave.

Indexed as

Career ChoiceStudents, MedicalAdultChildFamily Planning ServicesFemaleFertilityHumansOntarioSex Education

Identifiers

PMID38090998
PMCPMC10719828

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.