Experiential Exposure as the Key to Recruiting Medical Students Into Pathology

Medical student interest and pursuit of a career in pathology have been steadily declining since 2015. We conducted three separate surveys of medical students to better understand these trends. In our first survey, we focused on assessing U.S. allopathic medical students understanding and perceptions of pathology. We later surveyed U.S. osteopathic medical students as a companion to the allopathic medical student survey, in which many similarities were discovered with some key differences. In our final survey, we specifically looked at curriculum differences between the U.S. allopathic medical schools that graduate the most students who enter pathology training programs (Group 1) versus those schools that graduate the fewest future pathologists (Group 2) to determine if the curriculum had an impact on medical student matriculation into pathology. Together, through these surveys, we were able to identify several remarkable recurring trends, presenting areas of targetable action. Here, we summarize themes from the three studies as well as a review of pertinent literature to offer best practices for exposing and engaging medical students to pathology and possibly recruiting students to consider pathology as a career

How Influential Are Medical School Curriculum and Other Medical School Characteristics in Students’ Selecting Pathology as a Specialty?

There has been a significant decline in the number of United States allopathic medical students matching to pathology residency programs. Data acquired from the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) show sustained variation in the medical school production of students who go on to pathology residency. When divided into groups based on the medical school\u27s historical volume of graduates entering pathology, the schools in groups labeled Group 1 and Group 2 produced significantly higher and lower proportions of pathology residents, respectively. This study aimed to identify what medical school curriculum elements and other medical school characteristics might explain the differences observed in the AAMC data. The Dean or another undergraduate medical education contact from the Group 1 and Group 2 schools was invited to participate in an interview. Pathology Program Directors and Pathology Department Chairs were also included in communications. Thirty interviews were completed with equal numbers from each group. Interview questions probed pathology experiences, existence, and structure of a pathology interest group, options for post-sophomore fellowships, recent curriculum changes, and the extent of mentoring programs. Surprisingly, the curriculum does not appear to be a predictor of a medical school\u27s production of students who enter pathology residency. A significantly greater percentage of Group 1 schools are public institutions compared to Group 2 schools. Other factors that may increase the number of students who go into pathology include mentoring, active learning versus observation, and post-sophomore fellowships or other opportunities to work in the capacity of a new pathology resident