Muthukumar Akila V, Fong Zhi Ven, Buss Radek, Rolon Santiago, Kothari Anai, Datta Jashodeep, Calata Jed, SenthilKumar Gopika
Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology and Endocrine Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Med Educ Online. 2025 Dec;30(1):2471433. doi: 10.1080/10872981.2025.2471433. Epub 2025 Mar 7.
International medical students (IMS; non-U.S. citizens/permanent residents) greatly enhance the diversity of U.S. medical schools and serve in areas of greatest healthcare needs. Despite 15% of the US population being foreign born, international students represent < 2% of US-MD matriculants. Factors that contribute to this underrepresentation of IMS remain unknown. In this study, we analyzed the accessibility, quality, and inclusivity of publicly available admissions and financial aid policies at all US-MD schools, with the goal of evaluating potential institutional and informational barriers faced by IMS. Institutional webpages and American Association of Medical College (AAMC) databases were searched from May-July 2023 to gather IMS-specific admissions and financial aid information from 153 accredited US-MD schools. Two-tailed t-test or chi-square analysis was used to examine differences. An inductive thematic approach was used to qualitatively categorize institutional webpage friendliness. While 45% (69/153) of U.S.-MD schools reported accepting IMS, only 18% (27/153) admitted students without restrictions (e.g., Canadians only, state/religious preference). Further, 38% (26/69) of the schools that accept IMS did not provide financial aid information, while nearly two-thirds of the remaining schools required proof of personal financial ability with no institutional/federal support. International students also entered schools with a higher average Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) score and Grade Point Average (GPA). In the national AAMC databases, 19 additional programs were listed as accepting IMS although the institutional webpages stated otherwise; the databases also lacked details on specific restrictions posed by the majority of institutions. Of all 153 webpages, only 14% were deemed 'international friendly.' Restrictive admissions and financial aid policies as well as the poor quality and access to information are major barriers that affect IMS. Strategies that aim to overcome these challenges can greatly help advance diversity, equity, and inclusion in medical education.
国际医学生(IMS;非美国公民/永久居民)极大地提升了美国医学院校的多样性,并在医疗需求最大的地区服务。尽管美国15%的人口是外国出生,但国际学生在美国医学博士(US-MD)录取新生中所占比例不到2%。导致国际医学生代表性不足的因素仍然未知。在本研究中,我们分析了美国所有医学博士学校公开的招生和财政援助政策的可及性、质量和包容性,目的是评估国际医学生面临的潜在制度和信息障碍。2023年5月至7月,我们搜索了各机构的网页和美国医学院协会(AAMC)数据库,以收集153所经认可的美国医学博士学校的国际医学生特定招生和财政援助信息。使用双尾t检验或卡方分析来检验差异。采用归纳主题法对机构网页的友好程度进行定性分类。虽然45%(69/153)的美国医学博士学校报告接受国际医学生,但只有18%(27/153)的学校无限制地录取学生(例如,仅录取加拿大学生、有州/宗教偏好)。此外,接受国际医学生的学校中有38%(26/69)没有提供财政援助信息,而其余近三分之二的学校要求提供个人经济能力证明,且没有机构/联邦支持。国际学生进入学校时的医学院入学考试(MCAT)平均成绩和平均绩点(GPA)也更高。在全国AAMC数据库中,另有19个项目被列为接受国际医学生,尽管机构网页另有说明;该数据库也缺乏大多数机构所设具体限制的详细信息。在所有153个网页中,只有14%被认为“对国际生友好”。限制性的招生和财政援助政策以及信息质量差和获取信息困难是影响国际医学生的主要障碍。旨在克服这些挑战 的策略可以极大地有助于推进医学教育的多样性、公平性和包容性。