ArticleBMJ open2025
Specialty choices among UK medical students: certainty, confidence and key influences-a national survey (FAST Study).
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enthusiasm and structural frustration? Insights from an exploratory cross-sectional two-cohort study into career decision-making and retention factors in German neurology.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Student perceptions and understanding of urology in the United Kingdom - SPARK.BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Neurosurgery aspirants in UK medical schools: a national cross-sectional analysis of demographics, motivations, and confidence (FAST study).BMC medical education · 2026Article
- Article
- The impact of mobile internet usage patterns on employment intentions of medical students: A cross-sectional study.PloS one · 2026Article
- Too many, too soon? Challenges in medical school expansion in the United Kingdom.Human resources for health · 2025Article
- Socioeconomic and demographic predictors of extracurricular achievements among UK medical students (FAST study).BMJ open · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore factors influencing UK medical students' specialty choices and examine variations in these influences across demographic groups and stages of training.
designNational, cross-sectional online survey.
settingAll 44 UK medical schools recognised by the General Medical Council.
participants8,395 medical students. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was the specialty preferences of UK medical students. The secondary outcomes were factors behind these preferences and how these factors vary across demographic groups and different stages of training.
resultsGeneral Practice (15.3%), Paediatrics (10.6%) and Anaesthetics (9.9%) were the most preferred specialties among final-year students. Work-life balance (84.1%), compatibility with family life (78.2%), positive training experiences (85.2%) and future specialty outlook (74.9%) were key factors influencing specialty choice. Only 23.1% of students felt confident about securing a specialty training post, with confidence higher among males (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.52, p<0.0001) and privately educated students (OR 1.18, CI 1.03 to 1.35, p=0.02). Males were also more certain about their career choices (OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.31, p<0.0001). Confidence in securing a training place was positively associated with extracurricular achievements, including having a PubMed-indexed publication (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.39 to 2.00, p<0.0001).
conclusionsThis study highlights disparities in specialty preferences and influencing factors among UK medical students. A focus on improving career guidance, exposure to various specialties and supporting equitable access to training opportunities is essential for fostering a motivated and sustainable medical workforce.
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.