ArticlePloS one2025
Supporting international medical graduates-what can be done better? A sequential explanatory mixed-methods study.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundInternational medical graduates (IMGs) are a vital health workforce globally. Several challenges specific to IMGs warrant institutions to make necessary implementations to support their transition to working in host countries. To date, recommendations to support IMGs are frequently postulated based on challenges identified in the literature. However, there is a scarcity of information regarding IMGs' perceptions of these supports, and how supports can be improved, from an IMG perspective.
methodsA sequential explanatory mixed methods study was conducted to deeply understand how current and future supports might enhance the IMG experience. Between October and December 2023, a cross-section of IMGs across Australia were surveyed, recruited through a variety of non-random avenues. Following this, a qualitative phase comprised of interviewing participants. Findings are reported in line with Good Reporting of a Mixed Methods Study recommendations.
resultsIn total, 192 survey participants and 36 interviewees completed the relevant 'supports' section of the survey and semi-structured interview respectively. By collating the results of both the survey and interviews, findings were organized into the following categories: 1) Supports experienced by IMGs in Australia- 1a) Formalised institutional or workplace support, 1b) Informal networks and community support; 2) How institutions can better support IMGs- 2a) Improve operation of bureaucratic systems, 2b) Institutions can better mobilise IMGs by supporting integration and skill development, 2c) IMGs call for changes to reduce discrimination and exploitation risks; 3) How IMGs can better support themselves- 3a) Attitude and adaptation are important, 3b) Be prepared and seek advice early, 3c) Consider life stages.
conclusionsIMGs identified a range of useful current and recommended supports in and out of the workplace. In addition, IMGs have a role to play in harnessing their own agency for enhancing their own experiences in host countries. Further research and policy attention is required to ensure that institutions provide fair working conditions, support integration and prioritise cultural safety in the workplace.
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.