ArticleBMJ open2025
Another gap on the rota: a scoping review of attrition from specialty training in secondary care.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe healthcare workforce is in crisis. Despite a competitive selection process, a substantial number of doctors leave specialty training (ST) programmes prematurely. This attrition causes increased costs for the National Health Service, exacerbates workforce shortages and threatens quality and safety of care. It also increases pressure on trainees who remain, further compounding the risk of attrition. There is an urgent need to understand why doctors leave ST in order to find ways to maintain the training pipeline from ST to consultant.
objectivesWe aimed to understand what is known about why doctors choose to leave ST programmes in secondary care, to map current knowledge and identify avenues for future research. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All studies which investigated why doctors leave ST programmes in secondary care were included. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Ovid Medline, Web of Science, SCOPUS and EMBASE were searched until January 2024. Descriptive codes were assigned to the findings of each study. These descriptive codes were reviewed and grouped together in broader categories. CHARTING
methodsData was extracted and charted, and a qualitative content approach was used to synthesise data.
resultsA total of 6079 potentially relevant abstracts were retrieved, of which 23 were included in the final analysis. This included the experience of 1896 doctors who have left training and 454 programme directors. Doctors chose to leave training programmes because (1) they felt unsupported and underappreciated, (2) training was associated with unacceptable personal costs and (3) career prospects were unattractive.
conclusionThere is a mismatch between trainees' expectations of ST and the reality of being a trainee in ST. Understanding the issues which drive attrition and developing evidence-based solutions, has the potential to both reduce attrition, and improve the training experience for doctors in training more widely.
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.