Literature DB >> 35583935

Trends in U.S. MD-PhD Program Matriculant Diversity by Sex and Race/Ethnicity.

Angela Martinez-Strengel1, Elizabeth A Samuels2, Jeremiah Cross3, Laura D Cramer4, Mayur M Desai5, Ruth Gotian6, Cary P Gross7, Darin Latimore8, Jose E Cavazos9, Dowin Boatright10.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To examine demographic characteristics of matriculants to U.S. MD-PhD programs by sex and race/ethnicity from academic years (AYs) 2009-2018 and explore the relationships between trends in the percentage of female and underrepresented minority (URM) matriculants to programs with and without Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) funding.
METHOD: Linear regression and time trend analysis of the absolute percentage of matriculants into all U.S. MD-PhD programs was performed for self-reported sex and race/ethnicity, using Association of American Medical Colleges data for AYs 2009-2018, including an interaction for MSTP funding status (yes/no) and year. Linear regression of the percentage of programs matriculating no female or no URM students between AYs 2009 and 2018 was performed, focusing on programs in the top 3 quartiles by size (i.e., those matriculating 4 or more students per year).
RESULTS: Between AYs 2009 and 2018, the percentage of matriculants to all MD-PhD programs who were female (38.0%-46.0%, 1.05%/year, P = .002) or URM (9.8%-16.7%, 0.77%/year, P < .001) increased. The annual percentage gains of URM matriculants were greater at MSTP-funded programs compared with non-MSTP-funded programs (0.50%/year, P = .046). Moreover, among MD-PhD programs in the top 3 quartiles by size, the percentage of programs with no female matriculants decreased by 0.40% per year ( P = .02) from 4.6% in 2009 to 1.6% in 2018, and the percentage of programs with no URM matriculants decreased by 3.41% per year ( P < .001) from 49% in 2009 to 22% in 2018.
CONCLUSIONS: A consistent and sustained increase in the percentage of female and URM matriculants to MD-PhD programs from AYs 2009-2018 was observed, but the annual increases in the percentages across groups were small, and the demographics of the MD-PhD workforce still do not reflect the diversity of the U.S. general population.
Copyright © 2022 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35583935      PMCID: PMC9474393          DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000004747

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Acad Med        ISSN: 1040-2446            Impact factor:   7.840


  4 in total

Review 1.  Review of inverse probability weighting for dealing with missing data.

Authors:  Shaun R Seaman; Ian R White
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  2011-01-10       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Closing the Gap - Making Medical School Admissions More Equitable.

Authors:  Efrain Talamantes; Mark C Henderson; Tonya L Fancher; Fitzhugh Mullan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2019-02-28       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Association Between the Liaison Committee on Medical Education's Diversity Standards and Changes in Percentage of Medical Student Sex, Race, and Ethnicity.

Authors:  Dowin H Boatright; Elizabeth A Samuels; Laura Cramer; Jeremiah Cross; Mayur Desai; Darin Latimore; Cary P Gross
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  A national cohort study of MD-PhD graduates of medical schools with and without funding from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences' Medical Scientist Training Program.

Authors:  Donna B Jeffe; Dorothy A Andriole
Journal:  Acad Med       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 6.893

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.