Elderly hospitalized patients treated by doctors who graduated from non-US medical schools are slightly less likely to die within 30 days than those treated by graduates of US medical schools, according to a study published Thursday.

The study arrives amid the furor over President Trump’s 90-day ban on people from seven Muslim-majority countries entering the United States — an order that prompted concerns that it would block some foreign medical students from training and practicing here. About 1 in 4 US physicians were born abroad, and among internists, the primary care doctors who were the focus of the study, 44 percent graduated from foreign medical schools.

Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT Plus and enjoy your first 30 days free!

GET STARTED

What is it?

STAT Plus is STAT's premium subscription service for in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis. Our award-winning team covers news on Wall Street, policy developments in Washington, early science breakthroughs and clinical trial results, and health care disruption in Silicon Valley and beyond.

What's included?

  • Daily reporting and analysis
  • The most comprehensive industry coverage from a powerhouse team of reporters
  • Subscriber-only newsletters
  • Daily newsletters to brief you on the most important industry news of the day
  • Online intelligence briefings
  • Frequent opportunities to engage with veteran beat reporters and industry experts
  • Exclusive industry events
  • Premium access to subscriber-only networking events around the country
  • The best reporters in the industry
  • The most trusted and well-connected newsroom in the health care industry
  • And much more
  • Exclusive interviews with industry leaders, profiles, and premium tools, like our CRISPR Trackr.

Leave a Comment

Please enter your name.
Please enter a comment.

  • The US public education system is so under funded it’s no laughing matter! Then add all wasted education money and time spent on useless football and other sports. It’s pretty clear that our students are way behind India, China, and especially Western Europe.

    The best and the brightest and hardest working are absolutely not white Americans – across the board.

    America will die because of white nationalism and Trump and the Republicans!

    Germany will be the new leader of the free world!

  • It’s not only about the recent withhold/ban. Trump has already signaled to reduce H1B visas, which allow non US-IMGs to join medical residencies and work afterwards. The J1 visa opens doors to residency, but imposes a 2 year period of living outside US, which can be bypassed by a waiver given to those going to work in medical underserved areas under H1B. Holding back H1Bs will impact US medical service in both ends. There are not enough US graduates and US-IMGs to fulfill all residency spots and even less are willing to work where they’re needed the most. Medical knowledge is widespread and the greatest difference between US and other countries lies on structure and resources, not on clinical knowledge.

  • I wish the media would stop spreading the stigma that practicing US-IMG’s are somehow “less qualified.”

    Findings from previous articles, including Norcini 2010 (http://content.healthaffairs.org/content/29/8/1461.long), state there is no significant mortality difference between all IMGs and their US counterparts. There have been similar findings for IMGs in Canada and their Canadian counterparts.

    The article itself states, “Approximately 73% of US citizens who are international medical graduates attend medical schools in Central America and the Caribbean. Excluding physicians from these countries in our sensitivity analysis did not affect our findings.”

    I understand the focus of this article is on foreign-trained medical graduates, but practicing US IMGs should not be openly criticized without recent, peer-reviewed evidence.

  • I would say that a 0.4% difference is well within noise/variability.
    On the political aspect: aside from the moronic actions of the new government with complete disregard for the emotional, economic damage caused and the obvious illegality of those actions, I am pretty confident that the number of MDs/scientists affected by the ban is pretty much irrelevant in the contest of the whole US healthcare/scientific system. So, I do not think that overblowing things, and providing “alternative” facts like the other side does, is the way to go

    • You have to look at the data to determine if 0.4% difference is noise or is statistically significant. Depending on how much sample data is taken and standard deviation there is 0.4% can easily be statistically significant, I haven’t read the paper but I would assume is passed the <0.05 P value test

    • Dear, you should know as well that a p value is an arbitrary threshold, and 0.05 just happen to be considered an acceptable confidence value, not an absolute statement of significance (assuming that the statistical analysis was correct, and by experience I can say it is very often not the case). In particular, being the study based on observational reported data and not on a experimental lab work under controlled conditions, I feel fairly/absolutely confident that the difference is within noise. cheers

  • They should not have published this. The reason is because if the study had turned out differently and showed that foreign-educated doctors have worse outcomes, they would have buried the result out of concern for being racist.

    • Sorry to be late to this exchange, but your comment reminded me of an incident from about 25 years ago, when my division chief noted that all of our residents in medicine were FMGs, and he wondered if there would be communication problems with patients. A reasonable question, but our IRB refused to approve a formal study of the issue, and refused to offer any reason for their refusal. Turned out that most of the IRB members were themselves FMGs! We worked on the issue informally and found no problems whatsoever, but we were not able to publicize those results, since our IRB had nixed the project….

  • A moratorium was placed on immigrants from7 nations that the Obama administration indicated the governments were unstable and reliable information was not available for the immigrants. Comey said we have no way of knowing who these people are. Does anyone remember the doctors in London who drove a car into the airport.
    Can’t we wait 3 months to see if we can vet these people?

  • It seems to me that the true losers are the people in the countries these bright MD’s are leaving behind. A man I know who comes from Haiti told me “We don’t want to be here. If you really want to help me, help change things in Haiti.” Just a less selfish point of view.

  • First, this story starts out with a non-sequitur in that it states foreign educated doctors have a lower rate of patient mortality than Dr’s trained here but then the author worries that less students may come here for training. Second I’d bet my house that of all the foreign trained Dr’s coming here statistically zero came from Syria, the other 6 countries on the list are not on a ban but a temporary hold.

    • Good thing you didn’t bet your house, or you’d be looking for new digs – if you follow one of the links in the article (https://www.statnews.com/2017/02/02/match-day-trump-medical-students/)
      “Grover said the AAMC has identified more than 1,000 non-US citizens applying for residency programs who are from one of the seven countries or who have listed contact or family addresses there. Many of them have visas or green cards and are already in the United States…”

Your daily dose of news in health and medicine

Privacy Policy