PETER A. WEIL, Ph.D.; MARY KAY SCHLEITER, M.A.; ALVIN R. TARLOV, M.D.
Questionnaire III of the National Study of Internal Medicine Manpower was directed to a random sample of residents (and subspecialty fellows) in the spring of 1977. Residents were classified according to whether they sought careers as predominantly general internists (49%) or subspecialty internists (51%), and the two groups were compared. Future generalists, more often, tended to be non-Jewish, to have incurred higher debts, and to have trained in medical schools in the states where they had spent their childhoods. Training experiences also were different. Future generalists, more than subspecialists, were attracted to the field because of the ability to retain independence in their work. Subspecialists, more often, intended to have academic careers and locate in the largest cities. Although subspecialists expected greater financial rewards, neither group selected their fields on this basis. By controlling for the main criterion used to select the medical school attended, we were able to explain several factors that differentiated the two groups.
Learn more about subscription options.
Register Now for a free account.
WEIL PA, SCHLEITER MK, TARLOV AR. National Study of Internal Medicine Manpower: V. Comparison of Residents in Internal Medicine—Future Generalists and Subspecialists. Ann Intern Med. 1981;94:678–690. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-94-5-678
Download citation file:
Published: Ann Intern Med. 1981;94(5):678-690.
Education and Training.
Results provided by:
Copyright © 2017 American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.
Print ISSN: 0003-4819 | Online ISSN: 1539-3704
Conditions of Use
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only