ArticleCureus2025
A Cross-Sectional Survey on Generation Z Physicians: Professional Value, Educational Expectations, and Work Environment Preferences.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Urological training and job appeal for Generation Z-a rapid review].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Generation Z's attitude to urological work place environment-a pilot study.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- Leaning into Necessary Discomforts: Striving for Clinical Excellence While Maintaining Wellness.ATS scholar · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Generation Z (Gen Z) physicians, born between the mid-1990s and the mid-2010s, bring unique professional values and expectations to clinical practice shaped by technological and socioeconomic changes. This study explored these aspects of Gen Z physicians in Japan. A cross-sectional survey focusing on professional values, job-related training, supervisor attitudes, and work environments was conducted among first-year to third-year physicians in Japan. The participants were categorized into the Gen Z (≤29 years old) and non-Gen Z groups. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests identified significant differences between the groups. Of the 429 respondents, 391 were Gen Z members. They value job satisfaction, work for the benefit of others, embrace new challenges, and desire immediate feedback. Notable differences between Gen Z and non-Gen Z members were observed based on median Likert scale scores (1 = strongly agree and 5 = strongly disagree). Specifically, Gen Z physicians more strongly agreed that work is primarily a means to earn money for their personal life (median of Gen Z = 2 {interquartile range {IQR}: 2-3} versus non-Gen Z = 2.5 {IQR: 2-4}; p < 0.01), preferred working as a team rather than individually (median of Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 2-3} versus non-Gen Z = 3 {IQR: 2-4}; p = 0.02), and desired immediate feedback (median of Gen Z = 1 {IQR: 1-2} versus non-Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 1-2}; p < 0.01). They also showed a stronger preference for proactive communication from supervisors (median of Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 1-2} versus non-Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 2-3}; p < 0.01), chat-based workplace communication (median of Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 1-3} versus non-Gen Z = 3 {IQR: 2-4}; p = 0.01), cooperation over competition with peers (median of Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 1-2} versus non-Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 2-3}; p = 0.01), and socializing with colleagues of the same age (median of Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 1-3} versus non-Gen Z = 2 {IQR: 2-3}; p = 0.04). Japanese Gen Z physicians prioritize internal motivation, economic stability, immediate feedback, digital technological integration, and collaborative work environments. These findings necessitate adapted approaches to medical education and workplace settings that align with the distinct outlook of Gen Z.
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.