BMC Med Educ. 2010 Jan 25;10:5. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-10-5.
Available evidence suggests that international medical graduates have improved the availability of U.S. health care while maintaining academic standards. We wondered whether studies had been conducted to address how international graduates were treated in the post-graduate selection process compared to U.S. graduates.
We conducted a Medline search for research on the selection process.
Two studies provide strong evidence that psychiatry and family practice programs respond to identical requests for applications at least 80% more often for U.S. medical graduates than for international graduates. In a third study, a survey of surgical program directors, over 70% perceived that there was discrimination against international graduates in the selection process.
There is sufficient evidence to support action against discrimination in the selection process. Medical organizations should publish explicit proscriptions of discrimination against international medical graduates (as the American Psychiatric Association has done) and promote them in diversity statements. They should develop uniform and transparent policies for program directors to use to select applicants that minimize the possibility of non-academic discrimination, and the accreditation organization should monitor whether it is occurring. Whether there should be protectionism for U.S. graduates or whether post-graduate medical education should be an unfettered meritocracy needs to be openly discussed by medicine and society.
现有证据表明，国际医学毕业生提高了美国医疗保健的可及性，同时保持了学术标准。我们想知道是否有研究来解决国际毕业生在研究生选拔过程中与美国毕业生相比的待遇问题。
我们进行了 Medline 搜索，以寻找有关选拔过程的研究。
两项研究提供了强有力的证据，表明精神病学和家庭实践项目对美国医学毕业生的申请请求的回应至少比国际毕业生多 80%。在第三项研究中，对外科项目主任的调查显示，超过 70%的人认为在选拔过程中存在对国际毕业生的歧视。
有足够的证据支持在选拔过程中采取反对歧视的行动。医学组织应该发布明确禁止歧视国际医学毕业生的规定（正如美国精神病学协会所做的那样），并在多样性声明中宣传这些规定。他们应该为项目主任制定统一和透明的政策，以选择申请人，最大限度地减少非学术歧视的可能性，认证机构应监测是否存在这种情况。是否应该对美国毕业生实行保护主义，或者研究生医学教育是否应该是一个不受限制的精英主义，需要由医学和社会公开讨论。
