ABSTRACT
Objective
To describe practice patterns and challenges encountered by Complex Family Planning
(CFP) fellowship graduates.
Study Design
We invited all 110 obstetrics and gynecology physicians who graduated from the CFP
fellowship from 2017-2020 via email to complete an anonymous online survey. We inquired
about demographics, intended and obtained post-fellowship positions, and successes
and challenges in obtaining jobs. We used Fisher exact test to assess if the proportion
of graduates who grew up, attended residency, and completed fellowship in a U.S. region
(Northeast, Midwest, South, and West) and practiced in that same region differed.
Results
Ninety-nine (90.0%) graduates completed the survey. When entering fellowship, most
(n=92 [92.9%]) expected to practice in an academic environment. About half (n=49 [49.5%])
pursued fellowship with the intent to practice in a location with an unmet need for
abortion providers, of which 22 (44.9%) did so. Forty-nine (49.5%) respondents did
not practice after fellowship where they initially intended, citing common challenges
of job availability, family-related concerns, safety concerns, and relationship status
changes. We found associations between regions where graduates completed residency
and currently practice (p=.004), driven primarily by higher associations in the South
(76.9%) and West (70.6%) and a lower association in the Midwest (22.7%). We found
no association between current practice region and where graduates grew up (p=.15)
or completed fellowship (p=.23).
Conclusions
CFP fellowship graduates from 2017-2020 primarily intended to practice in academic
environments with half planning to practice in underserved locations. However, more
than half of those who entered fellowship hoping to fill an unmet need for abortion
providers did not do so.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to ContraceptionAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- The future of contraception: the future leaders of family planning.Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 205: S29-S33https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2011.06.054
Complex Family Planning Fellowship: Fellowship Application Information. Available at: 〈https://www.societyfp.org/fellowship/apply-to-fellowship/〉. Accessed December 11, 2022 .
Census Regions and Division of the United States. Available at: 〈https://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/maps/reference/us_regdiv.pdf〉. Accessed December 11, 2022 .
- A test for symmetry in contingency tables.J Am Stat Assoc. 1948; 43: 572-574https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1948.10483284
- Bowker's test for symmetry and modifications within the algebraic framework.Computational Statistics & Data Analysis. 2007; 51: 4124-4142
- Identifying national availability of abortion care and distance from major US cities: systematic online search.J Med Internet Res. 2018; 20e186https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.9717
- Projected implications of overturning Roe v Wade on abortion training in U.S. Obstetrics and Gynecology residency programs.Obstet Gynecol. 2022; 140: 146-149https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000004832
Article info
Publication history
Accepted:
March 1,
2023
Received in revised form:
February 27,
2023
Received:
December 27,
2022
Publication stage
In Press Accepted ManuscriptFootnotes
☆Presented in part as a poster abstract at the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists 2022 Annual Clinical meeting.
Identification
Copyright
© 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
