ArticleFrontiers in public health2025
Rushed health workforce reform in South Korea: a Kingdon's multiple streams framework analysis of the 2024 medical school quota expansion.
Article in Frontiers in public health, 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.
- Changes in the Distribution of General Physicians in Korea During the 2024-2025 Medical Crisis: A Descriptive Analysis Using Nationwide HIRA Data.Journal of Korean medical science · 2026Article
- Allocative inefficiency in physician workforce distribution: specialty-level NHI-covered reimbursement analysis in South Korea's single-payer system.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The Legislative Trajectory of Korea's Nursing Act: Insights From the Multiple Streams Framework.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In 2024, South Korea expanded medical school quotas to address physician shortages in underserved regions and essential specialties. Public concerns emerged over equity and distribution amid political pressure, limited stakeholder participation, and opaque workforce forecasts. Objective: To explain how political dynamics, stakeholder exclusion, and weak integration of evidence shaped rapid policy change, and to assess implications for workforce planning and essential-care access. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods policy analysis using qualitative data from policy documents, legislative records, and media coverage, alongside secondary quantitative data on physician distribution and residency application trends. Thematic coding and triangulation were guided by the three streams of Kingdon's multiple streams framework: problem, policy, and politics. Results: The findings reveal that policy urgency was driven by focusing events such as maternal emergencies and pediatric access crises. While numeric expansion was politically favored, workforce projections were inconsistent and failed to address specialty-specific and regional gaps. Political actors prioritized electoral considerations over evidence-based, inclusive reform strategies. Conclusion: Quota expansion alone is unlikely to resolve disparities. Sustainable reform requires transparent forecasting, targeted incentives, capacity for priority specialties/regions, and participatory governance with multi-stakeholder collaboration.
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.