Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40148944›Full record

ArticleGlobalization and health2025

Brazil's experiment to expand its medical workforce through private and public schools: Impacts and consequences of the balance of regulatory and market forces in resource-scarce settings.

Mário Scheffer, Paola Mosquera, Alex Cassenote, Barbara McPake, Giuliano Russo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Globalization and health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Mário SchefferPreventative Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Avenida Dr. Arnaldo, 455, 2º andar, sala 2166, São Paulo, CEP: 01246-903, Brazil.
Paola MosqueraPreventative Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Avenida Dr. Arnaldo, 455, 2º andar, sala 2166, São Paulo, CEP: 01246-903, Brazil.
Alex CassenotePreventative Medicine Department, Faculty of Medicine, University of São Paulo, Avenida Dr. Arnaldo, 455, 2º andar, sala 2166, São Paulo, CEP: 01246-903, Brazil.
Barbara McPakeMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Level 4, 207-221 Bouverie St, Melbourne, VIC, 3010, Australia.
Giuliano RussoThe Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, 58 Turner Street, London, E1 2AB, UK. g.russo@qmul.ac.uk.

Funding

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo 2024/17428-8Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo FAPESP, grant number 2023/10124-0Medical Research Council MR/R022747/1Pan American Health Organization OPAS/FFM SCON2023-00159
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is a global shortage of doctors, and governments worldwide are concerned with expanding national medical workforces to improve services. Since 2013 the Government of Brazil has introduced the Mais Médicos (More Doctors) Legislation (MML), which included policies to liberalise the medical education market and boost deployment to rural areas, and implemented quotas in public universities to improve diversity in the supply of physicians. Such experience provides an insight for the global debate on the role of the private sector in medical education.

methodsWe draw from the analysis of unique medical demography datasets to assess the impact of those policies on the number and distribution of doctors and medical students, composition of the workforce, and quality of training. To analyze the increasing trend of students and physicians, interrupted time-series analysis was conducted using segmented linear regression, comparing two time periods considering the MML as the start of the intervention. Staff-to- student ratios and ENADE educational attainment data were used to compare the quality of teaching between public and private institutions.

findingsWithin the context of Brazil's population and economic growth over the last decades, we find that since 2003 Brazil has almost doubled its medical workforce to 2.77 per 1,000 population, with the largest increase recorded after the 2013 legislation. Our analysis shows such growth has benefited poorer, remote states, although the bulk of new doctors and students are still located in the country's richer regions. The diversity of medical students increased significantly since the More Doctors Legislation, with more female (61.4% in 2023 as opposed to 55.5% in 2013), and mixed-race enrolments (25.5% and 19.4%). However, medical students are still predominantly white (68.7% and 71.6%), and from fee-paying secondary schools (68.1% and 75.8%). Comparison of student achievement scores and of deployed resources also show a significantly lower quality of teaching in private medical schools.

conclusionsWe conclude that Brazil's policy approach has delivered a substantial overhaul of its medical workforce through a combination of public and private sector policies. However, progress in students' diversity and quality of education has been mixed. Brazil's experiment suggests that private schools can be an option for rapid health workforce expansions in middle-income economies. However, close monitoring of their outputs would be needed, as our analysis shows they do little to address inequalities, and casts doubt on the quality of the training offered.

Indexed as

Education, MedicalHealth WorkforcePhysiciansPrivate SectorPublic SectorSchools, MedicalBrazilFemaleHumansMaleStudents, MedicalHealth markets in LMICsHealth workforcesMedical schoolsPhysiciansScaling-up policies

Identifiers

PMID40148944
PMCPMC11951509

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.