Table 3.
Summary of cloning pattern analysis.
| Specialty | Characteristics of physicians of the BSM cohort associated with significantly higher odds of entering a specialty (cluster)a |
Cloning pattern, compared to the group average of all physicians/specialists in The Netherlandsb | Cloning pattern, compared to physicians without a specialty or compared to the other clusters, incl. p-valuec | Supportive of reproduction of sameness? | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Migration background | Income percentile | Assets percentile | Nr. of HP parents | Urbanity degree | ||||
| Any specialty | No migration background | Specialists in the Netherlands more often have no migration background (79.0%), compared to all physicians (77.2%) | Specialists in the Netherlands significantly more often have no migration background (79.0%), compared to physicians without a specialty (73.9%) [p < 0.00001] | Yes | |||||
| Cluster 1 (Family medicine; elderly care medicine; intellectual disability medicine) | Female | No migration background | 71–90 | Specialists in Cluster 1 are more often female (60.1%), compared to all specialists combined (51.8%). Specialists in Cluster 1 more often have no migration background (83.2%) compared to all specialists combined (79.0%). Specialists in Cluster 1 more often have parents in the 71–90 income category (24.0%) compared to all specialists combined (22.8%). |
Specialists in Cluster 1 are significantly more often female (60.1%), compared to specialists in Cluster 2 & 3 (46.8%) [p < 0.00001]. Specialists in Cluster 1 significantly more often have no migration background (83.2%) compared to specialists in Clusters 2 & 3 (76.4%) [p < 0.00001]. When missings are not excluded, specialists in Cluster 1 significantly more often have parents in the 71–90 income category (24.0%) compared to specialists in Clusters 2 & 3 (22.0%) [p < 0.00001]. When missings are excluded, specialists in Cluster 1 significantly more often have parents in the 71–90 income category (29.0%) compared to specialists in Clusters 2 & 3 (27.8%) [p = 0.013,331]. |
Yes | |||
| Cluster 2 (all hospital specialties) | Male | Specialists in Cluster 2 are more often male (52.9%), compared to all specialists combined (48.2%). | Specialists in Cluster 2 are significantly more often male (52.9%), compared to specialists in Clusters 1 & 3 (42.5%) [p < 0.00001]. | Yes | |||||
| Cluster 3 (occupational medicine; insurance medicine; public health medicine) | No significant variables in the multivariable model. | No significant variables in the multivariable model. | Not applicable | ||||||
Each row shows which category within a variable was associated with significantly (p < 0.05) higher odds of entering a specialty or group of specialties, according to the multivariable logistic regression models in Appendix 3. Empty cells indicate that the variable was not significantly associated with the outcome.
Cloning pattern compared to the group average of all physicians/specialists: we compared the demographic characteristics of specialty clusters (in Table 2) in with the demographics of the entire physician population of The Netherlands (Table 2, column 7). We focused on the demographic characteristics which resulted in significantly higher odds of entering the specialty (summarized in columns 2–7 of this table).
Cloning pattern, compared to the other clusters: We analyzed whether the demographics mentioned in columns 2–7 of this table were significantly different from the comparison group, using the Chi-square test of association with p < 0.05.