ArticleCureus2025
The Evolving Landscape of the Medicine-Pediatrics Workforce: Lessons From the Last 10 Years.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective As a combined subspecialty, internal medicine-pediatrics (Med-Peds) physicians have played a significant role in both primary care and subspecialty care across the country. Over the last decade, the workforce has continued to grow and evolve. Thus, this study aims to characterize the current landscape of the Med-Peds workforce to address preconceptions and shine a light on current practice characteristics and career paths. Understanding factors influencing this group's career path is vital in addressing the needs of an aging population and physician shortages. Methods The survey study was designed by the Committee on Pediatric Workforce of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and modified by the Section of Medicine-Pediatrics (SOMP) Executive Committee. The survey was distributed electronically via SurveyMonkey to 3,536 AAP Section members and 3,230 Med-Peds members of the American Medical Association (AMA). There were 1,395 respondents, 956 of whom had completed Med-Peds residency training by 2022 and were eligible to be included in this study. Descriptive statistics and analysis, including frequency distributions and measures of central tendency, were used to summarize all responses. Statistical tests such as t-tests and z-proportions were used for comparative analysis. Results The majority of the Med-Peds physician workforce continued to practice across all ages (89.6%) as primary care physicians (65.4%) and worked an average of 50 hours per week. However, there has been a growing number of hospitalists (27.4%) and a trend toward practices in urban communities at academic medical centers. Growing financial concerns about educational debt and pay gaps between internal medicine and pediatrics as well as differences between early and late-career physicians also revealed changes in career choices, but overall satisfaction in training and specialty decisions was maintained. Conclusions Despite a multitude of external pressures affecting the workforce, Med-Peds physicians were satisfied with their training. They continue to add to the primary care sector and continue to see patients of all ages. While this versatile workforce can aid in the provision of care to populations particularly vulnerable during their transitions of care, such as children with complex medical needs, factors like increasing educational debt, widening pay gaps, and local competition will contribute to changes seen in work type and career paths. Further research to understand the career decisions of this workforce is needed to better address the rising physician shortages plaguing the entire country.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.