BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Several factors have been linked to the decline in medical student choice of a career in primary care (eg, gender, race, family income, student debt), yet understanding remains limited regarding the availability of curricular and co-curricular experiences for medical students within family medicine that may play a role, particularly one-on-one opportunities such as faculty mentoring and advising. Our study sought to collect baseline data on family medicine learning experiences during predoctoral training. METHODS: An online 21-question survey was sent to family medicine departments at US allopathic medical schools between January and March 2012 (84.6% response rate) to capture institutional representation and experiences within family medicine. RESULTS: Most institutions reported offering family medicine interest groups (98.1%), electives (97.1%), and clerkships (90.4%). Career advising as an elective course component was available at 53.8% of schools and as part of a required course at 46.2%. Comparison of public versus private institutions revealed differences in rural medicine experiences, admissions preferences, and residency director involvement in hands-on and small- group teaching. Additional differences were noted by total enrollment, number of family medicine faculty in senior leadership positions, and proportion of full-time clinical faculty teaching family medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Availability of family medicine curricular programming, formal advising/mentoring opportunities, and full-time faculty as teachers and senior administrators differed across various characteristics of medical schools. Results can be used to direct future research on medical student engagement with family medicine educational experiences relative to recruitment.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Several factors have been linked to the decline in medical student choice of a career in primary care (eg, gender, race, family income, student debt), yet understanding remains limited regarding the availability of curricular and co-curricular experiences for medical students within family medicine that may play a role, particularly one-on-one opportunities such as faculty mentoring and advising. Our study sought to collect baseline data on family medicine learning experiences during predoctoral training. METHODS: An online 21-question survey was sent to family medicine departments at US allopathic medical schools between January and March 2012 (84.6% response rate) to capture institutional representation and experiences within family medicine. RESULTS: Most institutions reported offering family medicine interest groups (98.1%), electives (97.1%), and clerkships (90.4%). Career advising as an elective course component was available at 53.8% of schools and as part of a required course at 46.2%. Comparison of public versus private institutions revealed differences in rural medicine experiences, admissions preferences, and residency director involvement in hands-on and small- group teaching. Additional differences were noted by total enrollment, number of family medicine faculty in senior leadership positions, and proportion of full-time clinical faculty teaching family medicine. CONCLUSIONS: Availability of family medicine curricular programming, formal advising/mentoring opportunities, and full-time faculty as teachers and senior administrators differed across various characteristics of medical schools. Results can be used to direct future research on medical student engagement with family medicine educational experiences relative to recruitment.