Clinical scientists' early career choices and progression: an exploratory mixed methods study.
Career choice
Clinical scientists
Job embeddedness
Mixed methods
Progression
Workforce retention
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 Oct 2021
06 Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
24
06
2021
accepted:
13
09
2021
entrez:
7
10
2021
pubmed:
8
10
2021
medline:
9
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Understanding the influences on healthcare professionals' career choices and progression can inform interventions to improve workforce retention. Retention of health professionals is a high priority worldwide, in order to maintain expertise and meet the needs of national populations. In the UK, investment in clinical scientists' pre-registration education is high and the need to retain motivated scientists recognised. We conducted a mixed methods study to investigate the career choices and progression of early career clinical scientists. First job sector and salary of trainees who completed the UK pre-registration Scientist Training Programme (STP) between 2014 and 2019 were analysed using descriptive statistics and Chi-Squared tests. Semi-structured interviews conducted with volunteer practising clinical scientists who completed the programme in 2015 or 2016 were analysed thematically and reviewed for alignment with theories for understanding career choice and workforce retention. Most scientists who completed the STP between 2014 and 2019 obtained a post in the UK National Health Service (NHS) and achieved the expected starting salary. Life scientists were more likely to work in non-NHS healthcare settings than other scientific divisions; and physiological scientists less likely to achieve the expected starting salary. Experiences during training influenced career choice and progression 0-3 years post qualification, as did level of integration of training places with workforce planning. Specialty norms, staff turnover, organisational uncertainty and geographical preferences influenced choices in both the short (0-3 years) and longer term (5 + years). Interviewees reported a strong commitment to public service; and some could foresee that these priorities would influence future decisions about applying for management positions. These factors aligned with the components of job embeddedness theory, particularly that of 'fit'. Training experiences, personal values, specialty norms and organisational factors all influence UK clinical scientists' early career choices and progression. Job embeddedness theory provides a useful lens through which to explore career choice and progression; and suggests types of intervention that can enhance the careers of this essential group. Interventions need to take account of variations between different scientific specialties.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Understanding the influences on healthcare professionals' career choices and progression can inform interventions to improve workforce retention. Retention of health professionals is a high priority worldwide, in order to maintain expertise and meet the needs of national populations. In the UK, investment in clinical scientists' pre-registration education is high and the need to retain motivated scientists recognised.
METHODS
METHODS
We conducted a mixed methods study to investigate the career choices and progression of early career clinical scientists. First job sector and salary of trainees who completed the UK pre-registration Scientist Training Programme (STP) between 2014 and 2019 were analysed using descriptive statistics and Chi-Squared tests. Semi-structured interviews conducted with volunteer practising clinical scientists who completed the programme in 2015 or 2016 were analysed thematically and reviewed for alignment with theories for understanding career choice and workforce retention.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Most scientists who completed the STP between 2014 and 2019 obtained a post in the UK National Health Service (NHS) and achieved the expected starting salary. Life scientists were more likely to work in non-NHS healthcare settings than other scientific divisions; and physiological scientists less likely to achieve the expected starting salary. Experiences during training influenced career choice and progression 0-3 years post qualification, as did level of integration of training places with workforce planning. Specialty norms, staff turnover, organisational uncertainty and geographical preferences influenced choices in both the short (0-3 years) and longer term (5 + years). Interviewees reported a strong commitment to public service; and some could foresee that these priorities would influence future decisions about applying for management positions. These factors aligned with the components of job embeddedness theory, particularly that of 'fit'.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Training experiences, personal values, specialty norms and organisational factors all influence UK clinical scientists' early career choices and progression. Job embeddedness theory provides a useful lens through which to explore career choice and progression; and suggests types of intervention that can enhance the careers of this essential group. Interventions need to take account of variations between different scientific specialties.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34615536
doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-07064-1
pii: 10.1186/s12913-021-07064-1
pmc: PMC8494160
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1059Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Postgrad Med J. 2017 Feb;93(1096):61-66
pubmed: 27307473
Br J Gen Pract. 2019 Aug;69(685):e578-e585
pubmed: 31109926
Arch Dis Child. 2015 Jun;100(6):537-41
pubmed: 25538188
Br J Gen Pract. 2017 Apr;67(657):e253-e259
pubmed: 28360072
Educ Prim Care. 2020 Jan;31(1):15-23
pubmed: 31851578
Med Educ. 2020 Sep;54(9):781-783
pubmed: 32557759
Int J Med Educ. 2018 Dec 27;9:332-339
pubmed: 30594907
Med Educ. 2020 Sep;54(9):821-831
pubmed: 32181908
BMJ. 2020 Jun 8;369:m2235
pubmed: 32513824
Acad Med. 2017 Nov;92(11):1536-1542
pubmed: 28379931
BMJ Open. 2017 Oct 25;7(10):e018462
pubmed: 29074517
BMC Med Educ. 2014 Dec 21;14:270
pubmed: 25528260
Med Teach. 2016;38(1):18-29
pubmed: 26372112