ArticleCureus2026
Specialty Preferences and Intentions to Work in High-Need Contexts Among Graduating Sexual and Gender Minority Medical Students.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSexual minority (SM) and gender minority (GM) students make up a growing portion of medical student bodies and face unique challenges that shape their career decisions. Identifying what specialties draw interest from SM and GM medical students is crucial for anticipating the composition of an increasingly diverse clinical workforce and understanding what contribution these students could make to addressing health disparities faced by LGBTQIA+ patient populations. AIM AND
objectiveTo study specialty choices and intent to work in underserved contexts among graduating SM and GM medical students in the United States and determine whether these differed from their heterosexual and cisgender counterparts.
methodsWe completed a secondary analysis of data from the 2022-2024 American Association of Medical Colleges' Graduation Questionnaire (GQ), which included responses from 50,185 graduating allopathic medical school students. Respondents were stratified by gender identity, as well as sexual orientation and sex. Descriptive statistics were calculated to examine the specialty choices of SM and GM students. χ
resultsGM and SM medical students were more likely to intend to work in underserved areas (GM: n = 241/473, 50.95% vs. cisgender: n = 13,378/46,413, 28.82%; p < 0.001; SM: n = 2,205/5,713, 38.60% vs. heterosexual: n = 11,308/40,796, 27.72%, p < 0.001) and with underserved populations (GM: n = 326/473, 68.92% vs. cisgender: n = 18,454/46,409, 39.76%, p < 0.001; SM: n = 3,070/5,719, 53.68% vs. heterosexual: n = 15,563/40,787, 38.16%, p < 0.001) than their cisgender and heterosexual peers. GM and SM students were also less likely to pursue surgical specialties than their cisgender and heterosexual peers (GM: n = 96/469, 20.47% vs. cisgender: n = 12,120/46,117, 26.28%. p < 0.01; SM: n = 1,312/5,660, 23.18% vs. heterosexual: n = 10,812/40,553, 26.66%, p < 0.001). Family medicine (n = 93, 19.70%) and psychiatry (n = 69, 14.62%) were the most popular preferred specialties among graduating GM students, while internal medicine (n = 848, 14.85%) and psychiatry (n = 685, 11.99%) were most popular among SM students.
conclusionThese results illustrate how GM and SM medical students are drawn toward specialties such as family medicine and psychiatry, which may be informed by these fields' perception as inclusive spaces. In addition, our findings demonstrate a decreased interest in surgical fields among GM and SM medical students. GM and SM students showed a greater propensity for intending to work in underserved clinical contexts and may become a core part of the clinical workforce supporting communities in need, such as LGBTQIA+ patients.
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.