Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38335164›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Disparities in pre-health advising across California's public universities.

Francine Rios-Fetchko, Mariam Carson, Manuel Tapia, Alicia Fernandez, Janet Coffman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Francine Rios-FetchkoLatinx Center of Excellence, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5795-7167
Mariam CarsonLatinx Center of Excellence, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Manuel TapiaLatinx Center of Excellence, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Alicia FernandezLatinx Center of Excellence, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
Janet CoffmanInstitute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, United States of America.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Supreme Court's decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc., v. Harvard College is likely to result in the matriculation of fewer students from historically excluded racial/ethnic groups at more selective colleges and universities and matriculation of more students at less selective colleges and universities. Because of this, it is important to understand how resources for pre-health advising, a modifiable factor that can help increase the diversity of the health workforce, vary across institutions with differing levels of selectivity. Colleges are known to vary in resources, structure, and investment in pre-health advising but data are lacking and there is no estimate of any pre-health advising resource gap. PURPOSE: To quantify availability of advising resources and identify perceived challenges in pre-health advising in California's highly diverse public and select private undergraduate institutions.

methodsStructured 60-minute Zoom interviews from June 2022 -October 2022 at 18/23 CSU (California State Universities), 9/9 University of California (UC) institutions and 6 select private institutions with varying levels of selectivity. Two investigators independently analyzed interviews using a Grounded Theory Approach. The full study team reviewed transcripts and themes. KEY

resultsPre-health advisor capacity varied greatly across the three types of institutions. CSU: mean = 1 FTE advisor: 24,620 graduates (range: 1: 1,059-1: 150,520); UC mean = 1 FTE advisor: 4,526 graduates (range: 1: 1,912-1: 10,920); private institutions mean = 1 FTE advisor:1,794 graduates (range: 1: 722-1: 5,300). Participants reported common challenges: advising capacity, lack of advisor training, advisor turnover, and student difficulties in accessing clinical opportunities and required coursework. CSU and UC participants noted that these had greatest impact for first generation and racially/ethnically underrepresented students for whom lack of informal professional networks, lack of other mentors, and financial responsibilities complicate college navigation and professional school application.

conclusionsStudents at CSU campuses had 5 times less access to pre-health advising per graduate than UC students, and 13 times less than students at private institutions. Much greater investment is needed in California's public institutions, particularly CSUs, to increase equity in access to advising for pre-health professional students. Research should examine pre-health advising resource capacity in other states, especially those that are now facing race-neutral admissions policies at undergraduate institutions and health professions schools.

Indexed as

Health PersonnelStudentsCaliforniaHumansUniversities

Identifiers

PMID38335164
PMCPMC10857704
OpenAlexW4391678310

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.