ArticleAdvances in medical education and practice2025
A Psychosocial Exploration of International Medical Graduate Journeys, Perceptions, Challenges and Resulting Impacts: A Sequential Explanatory Mixed Methods Study.
Article in Advances in medical education and practice, 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.
- Article
- Doctors as research participants - what is in it for them? A qualitative study of international medical graduates.BMC medical education · 2025Article
- Supporting international medical graduates-what can be done better? A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2025Article
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
Background: Several countries rely on International medical graduates (IMGs) to fill critical service gaps. IMGs experience a range of challenges related to migration, acculturation, accreditation and career. Purpose: This study aimed to explore the journeys, perceptions and challenges of IMGs based in Australia. Methods: We used a sequential explanatory mixed methods approach for design and analysis. An online survey was distributed Australia-wide to IMGs through various avenues (including snowballing) between 13th October 2023 and 31 December 2023. We later conducted individual interviews between February and April 2024. Quantitative data was descriptively analysed. Qualitative data from survey written responses and oral interviews were thematically analysed. Study data was triangulated and congruence assessed. Full Ethics approval was obtained. Results: The study comprised 286 survey participants and 36 interview participants. Working conditions, location/lifestyle and personal/family opportunities were among the reasons for Australia's popularity as a host country. The most disliked aspects were system processes (eg, bureaucracy, certifications, licencing etc) (87/199; 43.7%), and discrimination, bias, racism, or prejudice (53/199; 26.6%). Two major qualitative themes identified were: (1) IMGs have a rich and diverse set of experiences and (2) IMGs encounter unexpected challenges with widespread impacts on IMGs, family and society. We found high congruency of triangulated data from the quantitative and qualitative studies supporting concepts around IMG diversity of experience and choices, life stage priorities, privilege, mismatched expectations, criticism of bureaucracy, gaps in understanding nuances of the Australian workplace, social challenges, and impact of challenges. Conclusion: IMGs describe numerous permutations of journeys, challenges and general experiences which result from factors both inside and outside the IMG's control. Challenges, particularly those which are unexpected, may detrimentally impact IMG careers, health and desire to remain in their host country. Institutions have a role in adapting current bureaucratic processes to better support the IMG experience.
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.