1,105
Views
7
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Groundwork

Student Perceptions of M.D.-Ph.D. Programs: A Qualitative Identification of Barriers Facing Prospective M.D.-Ph.D. Applicants

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, , , &
Pages 1-10 | Published online: 14 Apr 2019
 

Abstract

Phenomenon: Despite a high degree of interest in research among matriculating M.D. students, very few apply to combined M.D.-Ph.D. training programs. Even fewer of those applicants are female, leading to a gender disparity among M.D.-Ph.D. trainees. We used a qualitative approach to understand why students choose not to apply or matriculate to M.D.-Ph.D. programs. Approach: We recruited recently matriculated medical students at a private research university with a self-reported interest in academic medicine and biomedical research to participate in focus groups, in which students discussed their career and life goals, general knowledge and sources of information for M.D.-Ph.D. programs, perceived benefits and downsides, and barriers to applying to such programs. Findings: Twenty-two students participated in focus groups. Participants desired careers combining clinical work, research, and teaching. Students had knowledge of the structure and goals of M.D.-Ph.D. training and received information about dual-degree programs from research mentors, the Internet, and peers. Tuition remission and increased grant access were cited as benefits of M.D.-Ph.D. programs, whereas duration, perceived excessive research training, and early commitment were downsides. Perceived competitiveness, misconceptions about training, a lack of M.D.-Ph.D. program-specific advising, discouragement from applying, and duration of training all served as barriers preventing students from pursuing dual-degree training. Insights: Through this qualitative study, we identified perceptions and misconceptions that recent medical school applicants have about M.D.-Ph.D. programs. These findings suggest targetable barriers to increase applications from interested students, such as improving awareness of programs, increased accessibility of advising and resources, and addressing concerns over training length, with the goal of improving training access for aspiring physician-scientists.

Disclosures

The authors report no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical Approval

This study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at Johns Hopkins University (IRB # 00124975).

Additional information

Funding

CJK, CJB, AGD, MOK, and OT are supported by T32 GM007309.

Log in via your institution

Log in to Taylor & Francis Online

PDF download + Online access

  • 48 hours access to article PDF & online version
  • Article PDF can be downloaded
  • Article PDF can be printed
USD 65.00 Add to cart

Issue Purchase

  • 30 days online access to complete issue
  • Article PDFs can be downloaded
  • Article PDFs can be printed
USD 464.00 Add to cart

* Local tax will be added as applicable

Related Research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.