↓ Skip to main content

The specialty choice of medical students in China: a stated preference experiment

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The specialty choice of medical students in China: a stated preference experiment
Published in
BMC Medical Education, April 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12909-016-0619-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dong Liang, Cheng-Xiang Tang

Abstract

Primary Care Providers (PCPs), such as internists and general practitioners, have been deemed a way of delivering cost-effective care in an equitable way because PCPs are responsible for providing accessible basic medical care for the general population. This study aims to examine medical students' preferences for PCP-based specialty choices in the context of an ageing population in China. We implemented a Best-Worst Scaling (BWS) experiment, a recently developed preference elicitation method based on random utility theory. Three hundred and fifty graduating medical students from three medical colleges were randomly recruited to evaluate 11 common medical specialties in China. A counting approach, a conditional logit model, and K-means clustering have been used to analyse the relative importance of items and preference heterogeneity among medical students. One hundred and ninety of 350 students completed valid questionnaires. General surgery was identified as the most preferred specialty among the overall sample, yet internal medicine shares the same importance as surgery. Both geriatric medicine and psychiatric medicine were found to be the least selected specialties. Finally, the K-means clustering further suggested there was preference heterogeneity across our sample. Two aims were fulfilled in this study. First, through our experimental approach the results provide a better understanding of the career desires of medical students in China. Second, the results of this study indicate that despite the fact a non-PCP-based specialty is the most popular among the sampled students; a PCP-based specialty is still an important alternative choice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 58 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 12 20%
Researcher 11 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Master 4 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 5%
Other 8 14%
Unknown 14 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 41%
Psychology 3 5%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 5%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 3%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 17 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 April 2016.
All research outputs
#18,616,159
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#2,794
of 3,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,056
of 303,377 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#61
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,576 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 303,377 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.