BACKGROUND: Increasing the attractiveness of primary care careers is a key step in addressing the growing shortage of primary care physicians. The purpose of this review was to (1) identify interventions aimed at increasing the proportion of undergraduate medical students choosing a primary care specialty, (2) describe the characteristics of these interventions, (3) assess the quality of the studies, and (4) compare the findings to those of a previous literature review within a global context. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, ERIC, CINAHL, PsycINFO, The Cochrane Library, and Dissertations & Theses A&I for articles published between 1993 and February 20, 2015. We included quantitative and qualitative studies reporting on primary care specialty choice outcomes of interventions in the undergraduate medical curriculum, without geographic restrictions. Data extracted included study characteristics, intervention details, and relevant outcomes. Studies were assessed for quality and strength of findings using a five-point scale. RESULTS: The review included 72 articles reporting on 66 different interventions. Longitudinal programs were the only intervention consistently associated with an increased proportion of students choosing primary care. Successful interventions were characterized by diverse teaching formats, student selection, and good-quality teaching. Study quality had not improved since recommendations were published in 1995. Many studies used cross-sectional designs and non-validated surveys, did not include control groups, and were not based on a theory or conceptual framework. DISCUSSION: Our review supports the value of longitudinal, multifaceted, primary care programs to increase the proportion of students choosing primary care specialties. Isolated modules or clerkships did not appear to be effective. Our results are in line with the conclusions from previous reviews and add an international perspective, but the evidence is limited by the overall low methodological quality of the included studies. Future research should use more rigorous evaluation methods and include long-term outcomes.

No abstract

BackgroundWeb-based surveys have become a new and popular method for collecting data, but only a few studies have directly compared postal and Web-based surveys among physicians, and none to our knowledge among general practitioners (GPs).ObjectiveOur aim is to compare two modes of survey delivery (postal and Web-based) in terms of participation rates, response times, and completeness of questionnaires in a study assessing GPs’ preventive practices.MethodsThis randomized study was conducted in Western Switzerland (Geneva and Vaud) and in France (Alsace and Pays de la Loire) in 2015. A random selection of community-based GPs (1000 GPs in Switzerland and 2400 GPs in France) were randomly allocated to receive a questionnaire about preventive care activities either by post (n=700 in Switzerland, n=400 in France) or by email (n=300 in Switzerland, n=2000 in France). Reminder messages were sent once in the postal group and twice in the Web-based group. Any GPs practicing only complementary and alternative medicine were excluded from the study.ResultsAmong the 3400 contacted GPs, 764 (22.47%, 95% CI 21.07%-23.87%) returned the questionnaire. Compared to the postal group, the participation rate in the Web-based group was more than four times lower (246/2300, 10.70% vs 518/1100, 47.09%, P<.001), but median response time was much shorter (1 day vs 1-3 weeks, P<.001) and the number of GPs having fully completed the questionnaire was almost twice as high (157/246, 63.8% vs 179/518, 34.6%, P<.001).ConclusionsWeb-based surveys offer many advantages such as reduced response time, higher completeness of data, and large cost savings, but our findings suggest that postal surveys can be still considered for GP research. The use of mixed-mode approaches is probably a good strategy to increase GPs’ participation in surveys while reducing costs.

In many countries, the number of graduating medical students pursuing a primary care career does not meet demand. These countries face primary care physician shortages. Students’ career choices have been widely studied, yet many aspects of this process remain unclear. Conceptual models are useful to plan research and educational interventions in such complex systems. The authors developed a framework of primary care career choice in undergraduate medical education, which expands on previously published models. They used a group-based, iterative approach to find the best way to represent the vast array of influences identified in previous studies, including in a recent systematic review of the literature on interventions to increase the proportion of students choosing a primary care career. In their framework, students enter medical school with their personal characteristics and initial interest in primary care. They complete a process of career decision making, which is subject to multiple interacting influences, both within and outside medical school, throughout their medical education. These influences are stratified into four systems—microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem—which represent different levels of interaction with students’ career choices. This expanded framework provides an updated model to help understand the multiple factors that influence medical students’ career choices. It offers a guide for the development of new interventions to increase the proportion of students choosing primary care careers and for further research to better understand the variety of processes involved in this decision.