Can Medical Schools Funnel More Doctors Into the Primary Care Pipeline?

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

Throughout her childhood, Julia Lo Cascio dreamed of becoming a pediatrician. So, when applying to medical school, she was thrilled to discover a new, small school founded specifically to train primary care doctors: NYU Grossman Long Island School of Medicine.

Now in her final year at the Mineola, New York, school, Lo Cascio remains committed to primary care pediatrics. But many young doctors choose otherwise as they leave medical school for their residencies. In 2024, 252 of the nation’s 3,139 pediatric residency slots went unfilled and family medicine programs faced 636 vacant residencies out of 5,231 as students chased higher-paying specialties.

Lo Cascio, 24, said her three-year accelerated program nurtured her goal of becoming a pediatrician. Could other medical schools do more to promote primary care? The question could not be more urgent. The Association of American Medical Colleges projects a shortage of 20,200 to 40,400 primary care doctors by 2036. This means many Americans will lose out on the benefits of primary care, which research shows improves health, leading to fewer hospital visits and less chronic illness.

Many medical students start out expressing interest in primary care. Then they end up at schools based in academic medical centers, where students become enthralled by complex cases in hospitals, while witnessing little primary care.

The driving force is often money, said Andrew Bazemore, a physician and a senior vice president at the American Board of Family Medicine. “Subspecialties tend to generate a lot of wealth, not only for the individual specialists, but for the whole system in the hospital,” he said.

A department’s cache of federal and pharmaceutical-company grants often determines its size and prestige, he said. And at least 12 medical schools, including Harvard, Yale, and Johns Hopkins, don’t even have full-fledged family medicine departments. Students at these schools can study internal medicine, but many of those graduates end up choosing subspecialties like gastroenterology or cardiology.

One potential solution: eliminate tuition, in the hope that debt-free students will base their career choice on passion rather than paycheck. In 2024, two elite medical schools — the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine — announced that charitable donations are enabling them to waive tuition, joining a handful of other tuition-free schools.

But the contrast between the school Lo Cascio attends and the institution that founded it starkly illustrates the limitations of this approach. Neither charges tuition.

In 2024, two-thirds of students graduating from her Long Island school chose residencies in primary care. Lo Cascio said the tuition waiver wasn’t a deciding factor in choosing pediatrics, among the lowest-paid specialties, with an average annual income of $260,000, according to Medscape.

At the sister school, the Manhattan-based NYU Grossman School of Medicine, the majority of its 2024 graduates chose specialties like orthopedics (averaging $558,000 a year) or dermatology ($479,000).

Primary care typically gets little respect. Professors and peers alike admonish students: If you’re so smart, why would you choose primary care? Anand Chukka, 27, said he has heard that refrain regularly throughout his years as a student at Harvard Medical School. Even his parents, both PhD scientists, wondered if he was wasting his education by pursuing primary care.

Seemingly minor issues can influence students’ decisions, Chukka said. He recalls envying the students on hospital rotations who routinely were served lunch, while those in primary care settings had to fetch their own.

Despite such headwinds, Chukka, now in his final year, remains enthusiastic about primary care. He has long wanted to care for poor and other underserved people, and a one-year clerkship at a community practice serving low-income patients reinforced that plan.

When students look to the future, especially if they haven’t had such exposure, primary care can seem grim, burdened with time-consuming administrative tasks, such as seeking prior authorizations from insurers and grappling with electronic medical records.

While specialists may also face bureaucracy, primary care practices have it much worse: They have more patients and less money to hire help amid burgeoning paperwork requirements, said Caroline Richardson, chair of family medicine at Brown University’s Warren Alpert Medical School.

“It’s not the medical schools that are the problem; it’s the job,” Richardson said. “The job is too toxic.”

Kevin Grumbach, a professor of family and community medicine at the University of California-San Francisco, spent decades trying to boost the share of students choosing primary care, only to conclude: “There’s really very little that we can do in medical school to change people’s career trajectories.”

Instead, he said, the U.S. health care system must address the low pay and lack of support.

And yet, some schools find a way to produce significant proportions of primary care doctors — through recruitment and programs that provide positive experiences and mentors.

U.S. News & World Report recently ranked 168 medical schools by the percentage of graduates who were practicing primary care six to eight years after graduation.

The top 10 schools are all osteopathic medical schools, with 41% to 47% of their students still practicing primary care. Unlike allopathic medical schools, which award MD degrees, osteopathic schools, which award DO degrees, have a history of focusing on primary care and are graduating a growing share of the nation’s primary care physicians.

At the bottom of the U.S. News list is Yale, with 10.7% of its graduates finding lasting careers in primary care. Other elite schools have similar rates: Johns Hopkins, 13.1%; Harvard, 13.7%.

In contrast, public universities that have made it a mission to promote primary care have much higher numbers.

The University of Washington — No. 18 in the ranking, with 36.9% of graduates working in primary care — has a decades-old program placing students in remote parts of Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho. UW recruits students from those areas, and many go back to practice there, with more than 20% of graduates settling in rural communities, according to Joshua Jauregui, assistant dean for clinical curriculum.

Likewise, the University of California-Davis (No. 22, with 36.3% of graduates in primary care) increased the percentage of students choosing family medicine from 12% in 2009 to 18% in 2023, even as it ranks high in specialty training. Programs such as an accelerated three-year primary care “pathway,” which enrolls primarily first-generation college students, help sustain interest in non-specialty medical fields.

The effort starts with recruitment, looking beyond test scores to the life experiences that forge the compassionate, humanistic doctors most needed in primary care, said Mark Henderson, associate dean for admissions and outreach. Most of the students have families who struggle to get primary care, he said. “So they care a lot about it, and it’s not just an intellectual, abstract sense.”

Establishing schools dedicated to primary care, like the one on Long Island, is not a solution in the eyes of some advocates, who consider primary care the backbone of medicine and not a separate discipline. Toyese Oyeyemi Jr., executive director of the Social Mission Alliance at the Fitzhugh Mullan Institute of Health Workforce Equity, worries that establishing such schools might let others “off the hook.”

Still, attending a medical school created to produce primary care doctors worked out well for Lo Cascio. Although she underwent the usual specialty rotations, her passion for pediatrics never flagged — owing to her 23 classmates, two mentors, and her first-year clerkship shadowing a community pediatrician. Now, she’s applying for pediatric residencies.

Lo Cascio also has deep personal reasons: Throughout her experience with a congenital heart condition, her pediatrician was a “guiding light.”

“No matter what else has happened in school, in life, in the world, and medically, your pediatrician is the person that you can come back to,” she said. “What a beautiful opportunity it would be to be that for someone else.”

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

This article first appeared on KFF Health News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

  • The Joy Of Missing Out
    Embracing the “joy of missing out” can lead to personal fulfillment. Reflect on appreciating life’s current state and choosing endeavors that truly matter to you.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Is Unnoticed Environmental Mold Harming Your Health?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Environmental mold can be a lot more than just the famously toxic black mold that sometimes makes the headlines, and many kinds you might not notice, but it can colonizes your sinuses and gut just the same:

    Breaking the mold

    Around 25% of homes in North America are estimated to have mold, though the actual number is likely to be higher, affecting both older and new homes. For that matter, mold can grow in unexpected areas, like inside air conditioning units, even in dry regions.

    If mold just sat where it is minding its own business, it might not be so bad, but instead they release their spores, which are de facto airborne mycotoxins, which can colonize places like the sinuses or gut, causing significant health issues.

    Not everyone in the same household is affected the same way by mold due to genetic differences and varying pre-existing health conditions. But as a general rule of thumb, mold inflames the brain, nerves, gut, and skin, and can negatively impact the vagal nerve, which is linked to the gut-brain connection. Mycotoxins also damage mitochondria, leading to symptoms like fatigue, brain fog, and cognitive issues. To complicate matters further, mold illness can mimic other conditions like anxiety, chronic fatigue, fibromyalgia, IBS, and more, making it difficult to diagnose.

    Testing is possible, though they all have limitations, e.g:

    • Home testing: testing the home for mold spores and mycotoxins is crucial for effective treatment; professional mold remediation companies are a good idea (to do a thorough job of cleaning, without also breathing in half the mold while cleaning it).
    • Mold allergy testing: mold allergy testing (IgE testing or skin tests) is often used, but it doesn’t diagnose mold-related illnesses linked to severe symptoms like fatigue or neurodegeneration.
    • Serum antibody testing: tests for immune reactions (IgG) to mycotoxins may not always show positive results if the immune system is weakened by long-term exposure.
    • Urine mycotoxin testing: urine tests can detect mycotoxins in the body, though are likely to be more expensive, being probably not covered by public health in Canada or insurance in the US.
    • Organic acid testing: this urine test can indicate mold colonization in areas like the sinuses or gut. Again, cost/availability may vary, though.

    For more information on all of this, enjoy:

    Click Here If The Embedded Video Doesn’t Load Automatically!

    Want to learn more?

    You might also like to read:

    Mythbusting Moldy Food

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Shredded Wheat vs Organic Crunch – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing Shredded Wheat to Organic Crunch, we picked the Shredded Wheat.

    Why?

    In this battle of the cereals, it comes down to the ingredients:

    • The Shredded Wheat cereal has two ingredients: wheat (shredded), and BHT. The latter is a phenolic compound and antioxidant.
    • The Organic Crunch cereal has lots of ingredients, of which the first two are wheat flour, and sugar.

    This means that, per serving…

    • The Shredded Wheat cereal has 7g fiber and 0g sugar
    • The Organic Crunch cereal has 3g fiber and 12g sugar

    Quite a difference! Sometimes, the “Organic Crunch” of a product comes from crunchy sugar.

    You can check them out side-by-side here:

    Shredded Wheat | Organic Crunch

    Want to know more?

    There’s a popular view that the only way to get fiber is to eat things that look (and potentially taste) like cardboard. Not so! There are delicious options:

    Level-Up Your Fiber Intake! (Without Difficulty Or Discomfort)

    Enjoy!

    Share This Post

  • The Small Daily Habits That Add 9+ Years To Life

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Things that aren’t on the list:

    • Springing out of bed for a 5am run every morning
    • Getting a divorce
    • Drinking 10% of your bodyweight in kale smoothies
    • Regular blood transfusions from a team of healthy teenagers
    • Cold water plunges

    Instead, the actual habits we’re going to talk about today are quite minor things, but they add up to big differences.

    First, we were a little silly with the above list, but actually before we move on, let’s examine it:

    The easier list

    We’ll not keep it a mystery:

    • Move more
    • Sit less
    • Sleep better
    • Eat better

    Now, probably none of those things are a shocking surprise, but what recent science has found is that the amount that most people need to improve by (in order to enjoy benefits) is much smaller than previously believed.

    Specifically, two large cohort analyses have shown that very small, realistic daily improvements in movement, sitting time, sleep, and diet are associated with serious reductions in mortality risk and notable gains in lifespan and healthspan.

    One of them (Dr. Maria Hagströmer et al.) found adding literally just 5 minutes per day of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity and reducing sedentary time by 30 minutes per day could reduce mortality by up to 10%.

    You can find that paper here: Deaths potentially averted by small changes in physical activity and sedentary time: an individual participant data meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies

    Another (Dr. Dorothea Dumuid et al.) found that sleeping 7.2–8.0 hours per day, doing more than 42 minutes per day of moderate-to-vigorous exercise, and achieving a diet quality score* of 57.5–72.5 were associated with an average 9.35 additional years of healthy lifespan, compared to not doing those things.

    *The diet quality score (DQS) involves assessing dietary components that make things better or worse, such as intake of vegetables, fruits, grains, fish, other meats, dairy, oils, and sugar-sweetened beverages (ranging 0–100; higher indicates better quality)

    If those changes seem too much, then note also that as little as 5 extra minutes of sleep per day, 1.9 additional minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day, and improving by just 5 points in the DQS were associated with 1 extra year of healthy lifespan.

    There’s a dose-response relationship here, as larger but still modest combined changes—24 more minutes of sleep per day, 3.7 more minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity per day, and a 23-point DQS improvement—were associated with about 4 additional years lived in good health.

    You can find that paper here: Minimum combined sleep, physical activity, and nutrition variations associated with lifeSPAN and healthSPAN improvements: a population cohort study

    Ok, but how to implement that?

    Short answer: little by little!

    Long answer: we’ll give our own long answer another day, as we’re out of room for today, but…

    You might like these excellent books that we’ve reviewed by Dr. Rangan Chatterjee, who specializes in getting people to do just this:

    Take care!

    Share This Post

  • Knit for Health & Wellness – by Betsan Corkhill

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Betsan Corkhill, a physiotherapist, has more than just physiotherapy in mind when it comes to the therapeutic potential of knitting (although yes, also physiotherapy!), and much of this book is about the more psychological benefits that go way beyond “it’s a relaxing pastime”.

    She makes the case for how knitting (much like good mental health) requires planning, action, organization, persistence, focus, problem-solving, and flexibility—and thus the hobby develops and maintains all the appropriate faculties for those things, which will then be things you get to keep in the rest of your life, too.

    Fun fact: knitting, along with other similar needlecrafts, was the forerunner technology for modern computer programming! And indeed, early computers, the kind with hole-punch data streams, used very similar pattern-storing methods to knitting patterns.

    So, for something often thought of as a fairly mindless activity for those not in the know, knitting has a lot to offer for what’s between your ears, as well as potentially something for keeping your ears warm later.

    One thing this book’s not, by the way: a “how to” guide for learning to knit. It assumes you either have that knowledge already, or will gain it elsewhere (there are many tutorials online).

    Bottom line: if you’re in the market for a new hobby that’s good for your brain, this book will give you great motivation to give knitting a go!

    Click here to check out Knit For Health & Wellness, and get knitting!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Strawberries vs Blackberries – Which is Healthier?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Our Verdict

    When comparing strawberries to blackberries, we picked the blackberries.

    Why?

    Shocking nobody, both are very healthy options. However, blackberries do come out on top:

    In terms of macros, the main thing that sets them apart is that blackberries have more than 2x the fiber. Other differences in macros are also in blackberries’ favor, but only very marginally, so we’ll not distract with those here. The fiber difference is distinctly significant, though.

    In the category of vitamins, blackberries lead with more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B5, B9, E, and K, as well as more choline. Meanwhile, strawberries boast more of vitamins B1, B6, and C. So, a 8:2 advantage for blackberries (and some of the margins are very large, such as 9x more choline, 4x more vitamin E, and nearly 18x more vitamin A).

    When it comes to minerals, things are not less clear: blackberries have considerably more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, and zinc. The two fruits are equal in other minerals that they both contain, and strawberries don’t contain any mineral in greater amounts than blackberries do.

    A discussion of these berries’ health benefits would be incomplete without at least mentioning polyphenols, but both of them are equally good sources of such, so there’s no distinction to set one above the other in this category.

    As ever, enjoy both, though! Diversity is good.

    Want to learn more?

    You might like to read:

    Take care!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Eating on the Wild Side: – by Jo Robinson

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    The author is an investigative journalist, and it shows here, as she leaves no stone unturned in her quest for the truth in the face of many food myths.

    She covers a lot of “popular wisdom” things that are varyingly true or false, or sometimes even both—in the case of food lore that’s a good rule of thumb, but has notable exceptions (e.g. “more colorful and/or darker-colored fruits/vegetables contain more nutrients”, which is a very good rule of thumb until one meets a cauliflower, for example).

    She also covers food preparation myths, and how, to give one example, in spite of the popularity of “less cooked is better”, in some cases certain cooking methods will indeed destroy nutrients; in others, certain cooking methods will improve nutritional availability. Either by destroying an adjacent antinutrient (e.g. phytates), or by breaking something down into a more manageable form that our body can absorb. Knowing which is which, is important.

    The book is organized by kinds of food, and does exclusively cover plants, but there’s more than enough material for any omnivore to enjoy.

    The style is… Journalistic, it would be fair to say. Which is not surprising, given the author. But it means that it is written in a fairly narrative way, to draw the reader in and make it an enjoyable read while still being informative in all parts (there is no padding). In terms of science, the in-the-prose science is as minimal as possible to still convey what needs to be conveyed, while 25 pages of bibliography stack up at the end to show that indeed, this journalist cites sources.

    Bottom line: this is a really enjoyable book, packed with a wealth of knowledge, and is perfect to uplift your cooking by knowing your ingredients a little more intimately!

    Click here to check out Eating On The Wild Side, and, enjoy!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: