Cited by 218Diversity and Career in MedicineMedical Education and AdmissionsCareer Development and Diversity

The leaky pipeline: factors associated with early decline in interest in premedical studies among underrepresented minority undergraduate students

Barr, Donald A., Gonzalez, Maria Elena, Wanat, Stanley F.·2008·Academic Medicine

Abstract

Purpose To determine the causes among underrepresented racial and ethnic minority groups (URM) of a decline in interest during the undergraduate years in pursuing a career in medicine. Method From fall 2002 through 2007, the authors conducted a longitudinal study of 362 incoming Stanford freshmen (23% URM) who indicated on a freshman survey that they hoped to become physicians. Using a 10-point scale of interest, the authors measured the change in students' levels of interest in continuing premedical studies between the beginning of freshman year and the end of sophomore year. Follow-up interviews were conducted with 68 participants, approximately half of whom had experienced decreases in interest in continuing as premeds, and half of whom who had experienced increases in interest. Results URM students showed a larger decline in interest than did non-URM students; women showed a larger decline than did men, independent of race or ethnicity. The authors found no association between scholastic ability as measured by SAT scores and changes in level of interest. The principal reason given by students for their loss of interest in continuing as premeds was a negative experience in one or more chemistry courses. Students also identified problems in the university's undergraduate advising system as a contributor. Conclusions Largely because of negative experiences with chemistry classes, URM students and women show a disproportionate decline in interest in continuing in premedical s…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/acm.0b013e31816bda16

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Barr, D. A., Gonzalez, M. E., & Wanat, S. F.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Barr, Donald A.
Venue
Academic Medicine
Published
2008-05
Volume
83
Issue
5
Pages
503-511
ISSN
1040-2446 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1985445858
Cited by
218
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
FWCI
16.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Academic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
California Wellness Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Diversity and Career in Medicine
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Medical Education and Admissions
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Career Development and Diversity
Keywords
premedical students, underrepresented minority students, medical school applications, women in medicine, undergraduate advising, racial and ethnic minorities, Stanford University
MeSH terms
Black or African American, California, Career Choice, Chemistry, Education, Premedical, Female, Hispanic or Latino, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Minority Groups, Physicians, Physicians, Women, Least-Squares Analysis, Cultural Diversity

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review