Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41168401›Full record

ArticlePediatric research2026

Concerns regarding the pediatric workforce: what are we missing?

Gary L Freed

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Gary L FreedSusan B. Meister Child Health Evaluation and Research Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. gfreed@med.umich.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Concerns about the adequacy of the pediatric physician workforce have intensified in recent years, yet many proposed solutions may not address some of the most critical underlying issues. This manuscript challenges prevailing assumptions-particularly the emphasis on financial compensation as a primary deterrent to entering pediatrics-and recommends a broader, evidence-based exploration of factors influencing specialty and subspecialty choice. While economic disparities between pediatricians and adult care providers are real and must be addressed, other influences may play a significant role in specialty selection among medical students and subspecialties among pediatric residents. There is a need to go beyond the study of those who chose pediatrics and turn instead to those who specifically did not choose pediatrics (and by extension chose other specialties). To grow the specialty, we need to find out what, precisely, would have made pediatrics, or one of the pediatric subspecialties, more attractive to them. We must also begin to grapple with the growing gender imbalance in the specialty and its impact on workforce adequacy. IMPACT: It is more helpful to look at longer term trends than focusing on yearly fluctuations in match rates. It may be helpful to learn from those who did not choose pediatrics what influenced that decision. There may be modifiable and non-modifiable inherent aspects to pediatrics which make it less attractive to some medical students. From a workforce perspective, there is a need to address the gender imbalance in pediatrics. There is a need to set workforce goals, not only to find problems.

Indexed as

Career ChoiceHealth WorkforcePediatriciansPediatricsPhysiciansFemaleHumansInternship and ResidencyMaleSpecializationStudents, MedicalWorkforce

Identifiers

PMID41168401
PMCPMC12956595

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.