Key disparities between first-generation and continuing-generation medical students: a quantitative analysis
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Background
First-Generation (FG) medical students face significant challenges that can hinder their academic success and well-being. Our study aimed to quantify the disparities between FG and Continuing-Generation (CG) students across four domains including: resilience, social isolation, unmet basic needs, and perception of institutional support.
Methods
An anonymous survey was administered to all four classes of medical students at Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine. Students had four weeks to complete the voluntary, 30-question survey which included 29 close-ended questions and one open-ended question to assess challenges in each domain. Survey data were collected in Qualtrics and analyzed using R Epi for R 4.4.1 GUI 1.80 Big Sur Intel build (8416). Primary analysis was performed using Students T-test to evaluate difference in means between cohorts, and one-way ANOVA was used in secondary analysis to correct for confounders between student attitudes across year in school. FG status was defined as having no parent with a 4-year college degree. Seventy-two students responded, and 62 completed surveys were included in the analysis.
Results
Among the 62 respondents (15 FG, 47 CG), FG status predicted increased resilience ( p = 0.01), feelings of social isolation ( p = 0.005), and unmet basic needs ( p < 0.001). Key disparities included food/housing insecurity, affordability of educational resources, and access to visiting student learning opportunities. There were no significant differences in resilience ( p = 0.656), social isolation ( p = 0.656), basic needs ( p = 0.07), or perception of institutional support, ( p = 0.651) based on year of training. The findings highlight FG students’ financial strain, disconnection from peers, and desire for targeted support. Institutional scholarships received by 47% of FG and 53% of CG students (χ2 = 8.4e-31, p = 1.0) mitigated but did not eliminate these disparities.
Conclusion
Our data reveal substantial, ongoing challenges faced by FG medical students and support the previous findings identified by Havemann et al. We suggest that by enhancing healthcare access, grants for educational expenses, subsidized study materials, and fostering peer networks, medical schools can proactively address these gaps in medical student success to build a physician workforce equipped to serve all patients and communities.
