Preferences of Medical Sciences Students for Work Contracts in Deprived Areas of Iran: A Discrete Choice Experiment Analysis.
contracts
deprived areas
medical students
preferences
Journal
Risk management and healthcare policy
ISSN: 1179-1594
Titre abrégé: Risk Manag Healthc Policy
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101566264
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2020
2020
Historique:
received:
23
04
2020
accepted:
08
07
2020
entrez:
18
8
2020
pubmed:
18
8
2020
medline:
18
8
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
An unequal distribution of human resources affects access to health-care services. This study aimed to elicit the preferences of medical, dentistry, and pharmacy students about attributes of work contracts in deprived areas of Iran; this is a primary important step to decrease inequity. Two-hundred and one students were entered into the study through proportional sample size estimation from Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences in the west of Iran in 2018. The attributes of work contracts were determined using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) method, then possible dual scenarios of work contracts were designed through the D-efficiency method of SAS software and the data were collected using a questionnaire designed by the researchers. The conditional logistic model was used to analyze the data. Salary, workplace, side facilities, scholarship, and workload were considered as important factors for working in the deprived areas ( This study provides new evidence about the preferences of medical sciences students for work contracts in deprived areas of Iran. According to the findings, money is not the only factor that affects the decisions of medical sciences students related to working contracts in deprived areas of Iran. Designing work contracts that are matched with preferences of the workforce can lead to an improvement in equity, access, and utilization of health-care services.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
An unequal distribution of human resources affects access to health-care services. This study aimed to elicit the preferences of medical, dentistry, and pharmacy students about attributes of work contracts in deprived areas of Iran; this is a primary important step to decrease inequity.
METHODS
METHODS
Two-hundred and one students were entered into the study through proportional sample size estimation from Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences in the west of Iran in 2018. The attributes of work contracts were determined using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) method, then possible dual scenarios of work contracts were designed through the D-efficiency method of SAS software and the data were collected using a questionnaire designed by the researchers. The conditional logistic model was used to analyze the data.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Salary, workplace, side facilities, scholarship, and workload were considered as important factors for working in the deprived areas (
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides new evidence about the preferences of medical sciences students for work contracts in deprived areas of Iran. According to the findings, money is not the only factor that affects the decisions of medical sciences students related to working contracts in deprived areas of Iran. Designing work contracts that are matched with preferences of the workforce can lead to an improvement in equity, access, and utilization of health-care services.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32801967
doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S259267
pii: 259267
pmc: PMC7406357
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
927-939Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2020 Kazemi Karyani et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Références
Health Policy Plan. 2009 Mar;24(2):151-8
pubmed: 19112071
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2007 Jun;4(2):93-100
pubmed: 17617671
Lancet. 2004 Oct 30-Nov 5;364(9445):1603-9
pubmed: 15519630
Int J Nurs Stud. 2012 Jul;49(7):834-41
pubmed: 22385911
Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2607-13
pubmed: 27648186
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Sep;97(38):e12358
pubmed: 30235695
J Adv Nurs. 2001 May;34(4):445-55
pubmed: 11380711
Hum Resour Health. 2009 Jan 21;7:4
pubmed: 19159443
Int J Prev Med. 2014 Oct;5(10):1314-23
pubmed: 25400891
Bull World Health Organ. 2014 Apr 1;92(4):277-82
pubmed: 24700995
Br Med Bull. 2012 Sep;103(1):21-44
pubmed: 22859714
Hum Resour Health. 2007 Mar 23;5:9
pubmed: 17381837
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015 Feb 11;4(3):169-80
pubmed: 25774374
Bull World Health Organ. 2010 May;88(5):364-70
pubmed: 20461136
J Prev Med Public Health. 2016 Nov;49(6):386-393
pubmed: 27951631
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019 Jun 09;8(8):488-497
pubmed: 31441289
Lancet. 2004 Nov 27-Dec 3;364(9449):1984-90
pubmed: 15567015
Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(8):661-77
pubmed: 18620460
Patient. 2019 Feb;12(1):137-148
pubmed: 30367434
Iran Red Crescent Med J. 2016 May 23;18(11):e29194
pubmed: 28191339
J Public Health Policy. 2011 May;32(2):263-76
pubmed: 21368846
Iran J Public Health. 2013 Jan 01;42(Supple1):155-60
pubmed: 23865034
Iran J Neurol. 2015 Oct 7;14(4):211-8
pubmed: 26885340
BMC Health Serv Res. 2015 Aug 27;15:344
pubmed: 26307265
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Jul 23;12:212
pubmed: 22824497
Nurs Health Sci. 2009 Sep;11(3):326-31
pubmed: 19689643