How neurologists are viewed by their colleagues: exploring stereotypes and social representations of neurologists.

INTRODUCTION: The choice of medical specialization is influenced by various factors, including personal, educational, and interpersonal aspects. However, stereotypes and social representations (SRs) can also play a significant role in biasing the choice of a particular medical specialty. The aim of this study is to describe and understand the social representation (SR) of French Neurologist among medical peers, and factors explaining stereotypes about neurology. METHODS: A nationwide web-based survey was sent to the French medical community (students, residents, and graduated physicians) to collect sociodemographic and professional data, status, experience, and acquaintance in Neurology as well as qualitative hierarchical evocation question to assess the SR of French Neurologists. RESULTS: Overall, 367 people participated in the survey, including 112 medical students, 170 residents, and 85 graduated physicians. Only 14.3% of students listed neurology among their top 5 specialty choices, and 63.8% disagreed with the statement "I could have chosen (or I will choose) neurology after the validation of my 6th year of medical studies." Qualitative analysis revealed that the most frequently occurring words used to describe neurologists were "stroke", "complicated", "no treatment," "clinical", and "brain" and five themes corresponded to SRs of neurologist: his/her personal and professional traits (36.4% of the corpus), his/her daily practice (18.1%), the negative aspects of the neurological practice (15.3%), and the neurological pathology and daily skills (30.2%). CONCLUSION: The perception of neurologists by other physicians is nuanced. Neurologists are described as rigorous specialists, maybe excessively so but the cliché of a contemplative specialty with no effective treatment remains. The specialty and neurological patients suffer also from a reputation of complexity. Further interventions among medical students and better information are required to increase the attractiveness of our specialty.

Medical oncologist stereotypes among medical students, residents and physicians: a national cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVES: The perception of oncologists could impact the attractiveness of the specialty and dialogue between oncologists and other physicians. The aim of the study was to describe and understand the stereotypes and social representation (SR) associated with oncologists among medical students, residents and physicians in France. METHODS: This nationwide web-based survey conducted in 2021 was based on hierarchical evocation methods. Qualitative analyses were based on the Reinert method with factorial analyses. Each respondent's SR was graded from 1 to 5 (from 1: very positive SR to 5: very negative SR). RESULTS: Oncologists suffer from a rather negative SR. The negative representation was mostly related to difficulties in practising and the proximity with death and end of life. Oncologists were also associated with more positive notions like interdisciplinarity or intellectual complexity. Attendance to an oncology course was associated with a better SR of oncology (p=0.036), whereas having someone in the family practising oncology had a negative impact (p=0.028). CONCLUSIONS: SR of oncologists is rather contrasted. It was positively influenced by attendance to an oncology course, which could be an option to correct stereotypes and update on this rapidly evolving specialty.

How do medical students, residents and graduated physicians really perceive radiologists? A cross-national study.

BACKGROUND: Radiology has always been an attractive specialty for residents, but its attractiveness has recently decreased in France regarding the median choice rank after at the National Residency Board. AIM: To study Radiologists' perceptions and social representations (SRs) among a group of medical students, residents and graduated physicians in France, to better understand the view of Radiologists to debunk stereotypes. METHODS: The nationwide web-based survey was based on valid hierarchical evocation methods. We determined the corpus's central core and SRs' principal themes with prototypical and correspondence factor analysis (CFA), respectively. RESULTS: Overall, 419 answers were analyzed. Radiologists' SRs were divided into 3 classes: negative stereotypes of Radiologists, negative stereotypes of the Radiologists' daily practice and Radiologists' skills. After multivariate analysis, variables that seemed to have a positive influence on Radiologists' SRs were considering radiology as a potential choice of specialty (p < 0.001) and the existence of practical experience in Radiology (p = 0.008). Women seemed to have a more negative SR of Radiologists than men (p = 0.035). DISCUSSION: This was the largest qualitative study on the subject and the only one among medical students, residents and graduated physicians, allowing a global picture. SRs of Radiologists seemed to be negative, potentially caused by poor knowledge of the Radiologists' profession. CONCLUSION: SRs of Radiologists among medical students and graduated physicians appears to be negative. Promoting the specialty among medical students and encouraging their immersion in a Radiology department could help to debunk many stereotypes about the daily life and missions of Radiologists.

What do medical students and graduated physicians think about infectious disease specialists?

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the social representation and stereotypes on infectious disease (ID) specialists among medical students and physicians in France after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: A survey applying the hierarchical evocation model assessed the social representations (SRs) of ID specialists. RESULTS: All in all, 372 answers were analyzed. The positive elements related to the personal and professional qualities of ID specialists ('intellectual prestige", "open-mindedness"), in contrast with negative stereotypes related to their perceived daily life and practice characteristics ("hospital-based", "intense", "overspecialized"). Variables such as "I would not have chosen (or I won't choose) ID after the national ranking exam" and "I know someone who is an ID specialist" were associated with worse SR scores (p < 0.001 and p = 0.022 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide insights into the attractiveness of ID as a specialty. Rounds in ID departments may enhance the interest of the specialty as a possible residency choice.