Comparison of attitudes toward community-based medicine between regional-quota and general-selected medical student in Japan.

Nobuyasu Komasawa, Masanao Yokohira
Author Information
  1. Nobuyasu Komasawa: Community Medicine Education Promotion Office, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Japan.
  2. Masanao Yokohira: Department of Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, Kagawa University, Japan.

Abstract

This study compared the regional-quota and general-selected medical students' understanding, interest, and confidence in the community medicine practice and their attitudes toward the concept guidelines. We conducted a Web-based questionnaire survey regarding the understanding, interest, and confidence in future community medicine practice and attitudes toward concept guidelines among medical students of all grades (regional-quota and general-selected: n=82 and n=617, respectively). The overall response rates were 68.5% (56/82) and 66.0% (409/617) in the regional-quota and general-selected groups, respectively. Although there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of understanding (=0.998), interest and confidence in future practice were significantly higher in the regional-quota group (both <0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups for any of the six questions regarding community medicine guidelines. The understanding of community medicine or its conceptual guidelines did not significantly differ between the two groups; however, interest and confidence in future practice were significantly higher in the regional-quota group. These results suggest that the regional-quota system positively upregulates the interest in community medicine, which could be associated with confidence in future practice. Comprehensive and longitudinal improvements in the regional-quota system may be effective in cultivating community medicine.

Keywords

References

  1. Acad Med. 2021 Feb 1;96(2):199-204 [PMID: 33060399]
  2. Med Educ. 2016 Sep;50(9):912-21 [PMID: 27562891]
  3. Acute Med Surg. 2020 Oct 02;7(1):e576 [PMID: 33024569]
  4. Med Educ Online. 2023 Dec;28(1):2175405 [PMID: 36794397]
  5. Educ Health (Abingdon). 2002;15(2):117-28 [PMID: 14741960]
  6. Med Educ. 2012 Feb;46(2):179-91 [PMID: 22239332]
  7. Int J Med Educ. 2022 Nov 30;13:307-314 [PMID: 36463571]
  8. BMC Med Educ. 2022 Nov 17;22(1):799 [PMID: 36397056]
  9. PLoS One. 2020 Mar 26;15(3):e0230792 [PMID: 32214357]
  10. Med Educ. 2006 Feb;40(2):109-16 [PMID: 16451237]
  11. BMJ Open. 2021 Jan 7;11(1):e039344 [PMID: 33414140]
  12. Cureus. 2023 Mar 21;15(3):e36495 [PMID: 37090407]
  13. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Aug 19;101(33):e30135 [PMID: 35984142]
  14. J Gen Fam Med. 2019 Dec 13;21(2):3-8 [PMID: 32161694]
  15. Rural Remote Health. 2017 Dec;17(4):4521 [PMID: 29207876]
  16. Med Teach. 2017 Jan;39(1):7-13 [PMID: 27832713]
  17. Med Teach. 2002 Jan;24(1):9-12 [PMID: 12098450]
  18. Rural Remote Health. 2015 Apr-Jun;15(2):3112 [PMID: 26066764]
  19. Ann Fam Med. 2015 May-Jun;13(3):206-13 [PMID: 25964397]
  20. BMC Med Educ. 2023 Feb 9;23(1):103 [PMID: 36759816]
  21. Med Educ Online. 2016 May 11;21:29448 [PMID: 27172894]
  22. PLoS One. 2021 Mar 15;16(3):e0248569 [PMID: 33720982]
  23. Fam Med. 2017 Jul;49(7):507-513 [PMID: 28724147]
  24. Med Educ. 2000 Jul;34(7):558-65 [PMID: 10886639]
  25. Rural Remote Health. 2015 Jul-Sep;15(3):2991 [PMID: 26377746]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0regional-quotamedicinecommunityinterestconfidencepracticemedicalunderstandingguidelinesfuturegroupsgeneral-selectedattitudestowardsignificantlyconceptquestionnairesurveyregardingrespectivelysignificantdifferencehighergrouptwosystemstudentstudycomparedstudents'conductedWeb-basedamongstudentsgradesgeneral-selected:n=82n=617overallresponserates685%56/82660%409/617Althoughterms=0998<0001sixquestionsconceptualdifferhoweverresultssuggestpositivelyupregulatesassociatedComprehensivelongitudinalimprovementsmayeffectivecultivatingComparisoncommunity-basedJapan

Similar Articles

Cited By