ArticleBMC medical education2025
Doctors as research participants - what is in it for them? A qualitative study of international medical graduates.
Article in BMC medical education, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDoctors are key players in the healthcare system. Their first-hand experience in the workplace may provide researchers with special insight into health service gaps and solutions. However, doctors are typically time poor with high professional demands. Little is reported about how to best engage doctors in research as participants. International medical graduates (IMGs) are a special cohort of doctors with unique challenges, whose experiences and perceptions have been scarcely voiced within research to date.
methodsWe conducted a qualitative study to explore IMG motives of participation in research. The study was conducted in February to April 2024 and comprised of semi-structured individual interviews with IMGs based in Australia. The interviews followed an online national survey which had been conducted the previous year. Recruited interview participants were primarily drawn from participants from the preceding survey who had indicated interest in participation in the follow-up qualitative study, in addition to any participants indicating interest via snowballing. Participants were eligible for inclusion if they were living or working in Australia, with a primary medical qualification from overseas, irrespective of current employment status. Data was audio-recorded and thematically analysed.
resultsIMGs (36) were individually interviewed by telephone (21), teleconference (14) and face-to-face (1). We identified three major themes and four subthemes: (1) Research is considered a safe and trusted tool; 1a) Research provides an opportunity to voice, broadcast and enact change, 1b) Safe and anonymous sharing of personal stories and experiences is therapeutic; (2) Personal relevance and interest motivates participation; 2a) Passion for the research topic drives participation, 2b) Comradery and empathy for peers convicts participants to advocate for others through engagement (3) Respect for Research drives engagement.
conclusionIMGs have a variety of personal motives for participating in research. Understanding these motives can be useful for researchers seeking to recruit such doctors for research in the future.
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.