Academic performance of Brazilian medical students during internship: Regular path versus affirmative action system.

IF 4 2区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES

Medical Teacher Pub Date : 2026-10-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-26 DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2026.2634074

Claudia Regina Zaramella, Fábio Ferreira Amorim

{"title":"Academic performance of Brazilian medical students during internship: Regular path versus affirmative action system.","authors":"Claudia Regina Zaramella, Fábio Ferreira Amorim","doi":"10.1080/0142159X.2026.2634074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Affirmative action policies have been implemented to promote equitable access to higher education for socially vulnerable students, although their influence on student outcomes remains debated. This study compared the academic performance of students admitted through the regular path (RP) and affirmative action (AA) system, at a Brazilian public medical school.Methods: This prospective cohort study included 236 fifth-year medical students from the School of Health Sciences (ESCS), between 2022 and 2024. Sociodemographic and economic data were obtained from institutional and national databases. Academic performance was assessed through cognitive, practical, and professionalism evaluations, as well as the final annual grade.Results: Of 236 students, 134 (56.8%) entered via RP and 102 (43.2%) via AA. AA students were older, less often self-declared white, had lower parental education, and worse socioeconomic indicators (all p < 0.001). In univariate analyses, RP students scored higher in three of four evaluations (p < 0.001). After adjustment, admission type was not associated with performance. Cognitive scores correlated with younger age at admission (β: -0.039; 95% CI: -0.065 to -0.014; p < 0.001). Mini-CEX showed no significant associations. Professionalism scores were higher among female (β: 0.165; 95% CI: 0.013 to 0.316; p = 0.033), married (β: 0.589; 95% CI: 0.151 to 1.027; p = 0.009), those with a parent holding higher education (β: 0.242; 95% CI: 0.036 to 0.448; p = 0.021), and younger entrants (β: -0.033; 95% CI: -0.055 to -0.011; p = 0.003). Final grades were higher among female (β: 0.146; 95% CI: 0.032 to 0.261; p = 0.013), married (β: 0.376; 95% CI: 0.044 to 0.708; p = 0.027), and younger students (β: -0.032; 95% CI: -0.048 to -0.015; p < 0.001).Discussion: After adjusting for sociodemographic and economic factors, RP and AA students performed similarly, supporting AA as an effective inclusion policy.","PeriodicalId":18643,"journal":{"name":"Medical Teacher","volume":" ","pages":"1664-1675"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medical Teacher","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2026.2634074","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Affirmative action policies have been implemented to promote equitable access to higher education for socially vulnerable students, although their influence on student outcomes remains debated. This study compared the academic performance of students admitted through the regular path (RP) and affirmative action (AA) system, at a Brazilian public medical school.

Methods: This prospective cohort study included 236 fifth-year medical students from the School of Health Sciences (ESCS), between 2022 and 2024. Sociodemographic and economic data were obtained from institutional and national databases. Academic performance was assessed through cognitive, practical, and professionalism evaluations, as well as the final annual grade.

Results: Of 236 students, 134 (56.8%) entered via RP and 102 (43.2%) via AA. AA students were older, less often self-declared white, had lower parental education, and worse socioeconomic indicators (all p < 0.001). In univariate analyses, RP students scored higher in three of four evaluations (p < 0.001). After adjustment, admission type was not associated with performance. Cognitive scores correlated with younger age at admission (β: -0.039; 95% CI: -0.065 to -0.014; p < 0.001). Mini-CEX showed no significant associations. Professionalism scores were higher among female (β: 0.165; 95% CI: 0.013 to 0.316; p = 0.033), married (β: 0.589; 95% CI: 0.151 to 1.027; p = 0.009), those with a parent holding higher education (β: 0.242; 95% CI: 0.036 to 0.448; p = 0.021), and younger entrants (β: -0.033; 95% CI: -0.055 to -0.011; p = 0.003). Final grades were higher among female (β: 0.146; 95% CI: 0.032 to 0.261; p = 0.013), married (β: 0.376; 95% CI: 0.044 to 0.708; p = 0.027), and younger students (β: -0.032; 95% CI: -0.048 to -0.015; p < 0.001).

Discussion: After adjusting for sociodemographic and economic factors, RP and AA students performed similarly, supporting AA as an effective inclusion policy.

查看原文本刊更多论文

巴西医学生实习期间的学业表现：常规路径与平权行动制度。

导言：实施平权行动政策是为了促进社会弱势学生公平接受高等教育，尽管这些政策对学生成绩的影响仍存在争议。这项研究比较了巴西一所公立医学院通过常规路径（RP）和平权行动（AA）系统录取的学生的学业表现。方法：这项前瞻性队列研究包括236名来自健康科学学院（ESCS）的五年级学生，时间为2022年至2024年。社会人口和经济数据来自机构和国家数据库。学业成绩通过认知、实践和专业评估以及最终年度成绩进行评估。结果：236名学生中有134名（56.8%）通过RP入学，102名（43.2%）通过AA入学。AA学生年龄较大，很少自称为白人，父母受教育程度较低，社会经济指标较差（所有p p p p = 0.033），已婚（β: 0.589; 95% CI: 0.151至1.027;p = 0.009），父母受过高等教育（β: 0.242; 95% CI: 0.036至0.448;p = 0.021），以及较年轻的入学（β: -0.033; 95% CI: -0.055至-0.011;p = 0.003）。女生（β: 0.146; 95% CI: 0.032至0.261;p = 0.013）、已婚（β: 0.376; 95% CI: 0.044至0.708;p = 0.027）和低年级学生（β: -0.032; 95% CI: -0.048至-0.015;p）的最终成绩较高，结论：在调整了社会人口统计学和经济因素后，RP和AA学生的表现相似，支持AA是一项有效的包容政策。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Medical Teacher 医学-卫生保健

CiteScore

7.80

自引率

8.50%

发文量

396

审稿时长

3-6 weeks

期刊介绍： Medical Teacher provides accounts of new teaching methods, guidance on structuring courses and assessing achievement, and serves as a forum for communication between medical teachers and those involved in general education. In particular, the journal recognizes the problems teachers have in keeping up-to-date with the developments in educational methods that lead to more effective teaching and learning at a time when the content of the curriculum—from medical procedures to policy changes in health care provision—is also changing. The journal features reports of innovation and research in medical education, case studies, survey articles, practical guidelines, reviews of current literature and book reviews. All articles are peer reviewed.