[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
July 1988

National Study of Internal Medicine ManpowerXII. The Future of Graduate Medical Education in Internal Medicine: What Do Program Directors Predict?

Author Affiliations

From the School of Public Health, University of Texas, Houston (Dr Aday); the Center for Health Administration Studies, The University of Chicago (Dr Andersen, Messrs Lyttle and Cornelius, and Ms Glen); and the Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh (Dr Levey).

Arch Intern Med. 1988;148(7):1509-1514. doi:10.1001/archinte.1988.00380070027008

• The 1985-1986 National Study of Internal Medicine Manpower asked directors of residency and fellowship programs about their plans to change the size of their programs in the near future. The vast majority (71% to 76%) of the directors expected their programs to remain about the same size for the next couple of years. For fellowship directors, this reflects a decline in the number planning to increase their program size since 1976-1977 from 32% to 18%. Directors of programs that are principal affiliates of medical schools are more likely to plan a decrease, while Veterans Administration directors are more likely to plan an increase in program size. The reason residency directors cited most frequently as important to their plans to increase program size was a perceived shortage of internists. Fellowship directors most frequently cited the need for fellows in clinical research. Stipend availability was the most important factor that influenced plans to decrease program size. Overall, residency and fellowship directors planned to increase the size of their programs around 1%. Program directors and others in the internal medicine community should consider how they can change the stipend availability, admissions criteria, and other incentives to channel trainees into the areas of greatest potential need and demand for the profession.

(Arch Intern Med 1988;148:1509-1514)