Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41404219›Full record

ArticleCureus2025

The Cost of Becoming a Surgeon: A Comparative Analysis of Human and Veterinary Surgical Specialisation in the United Kingdom.

Matthew How Saw Keng, Megan Anley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Matthew How Saw KengTrauma and Orthopaedics, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, GBR.
Megan AnleyGeneral Practice, Woodlands Veterinary Hospital, Plymouth, GBR.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Medicine and veterinary science share similar undergraduate foundations yet diverge significantly after qualification. Medical graduates progress through salaried, structured NHS training, whereas veterinarians enter privately funded, variable pathways toward specialist recognition. Aim The main aim of this study is to compare duration, cost, salary trajectory, burnout, and retention across human and veterinary surgical specialisation in the United Kingdom, using a cross-sectional comparative design. Methods Cross-sectional descriptive comparative study using 2024-2025 publicly available UK data from regulatory, educational, and professional bodies. Domains included training duration, financial cost, salary progression, burnout, and retention. Results Human surgical training averages 15 years versus 11-12 for veterinary surgeons. Estimated personal costs totalled £48,600 (human) and £56,000 (veterinary). Human trainees are salaried throughout (£38,000-£145,000), whereas veterinary trainees earn £19,600-£51,000 during internships and residencies before reaching £70,000-£100,000+. Reported burnout prevalence ranged from approximately 52% (veterinary) to 66% (medical), based on profession-specific national surveys rather than directly comparable instruments. Retention exceeded 70% at 10 years for human consultants; precise veterinary specialist data were unavailable. Salaries vary by institution and are subject to change; the figures reported reflect data available at the time of the search. Conclusion Veterinary surgical training is shorter but financially riskier, with delayed return on investment and limited structural support. Both professions face high burnout and retention pressures, underscoring the need for sustainable, well-supported postgraduate frameworks.

Indexed as

burnoutcareer choiceeconomics of educationeducationmedicalpostgraduate educationspecializationsurgeryveterinaryworkforce retention

Identifiers

PMID41404219
PMCPMC12705160

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.