Career, Autonomy, Rights and Equity among Doctors: Brazilian Medical Association survey
Authors:
- Luciana Rodrigues SilvaLSLuciana Rodrigues Silva
- Maria Rita de Souza MesquitaMMMaria Rita de Souza Mesquita
- Claudia Navarro Carvalho Duarte LemusCLClaudia Navarro Carvalho Duarte Lemus
- Alex Jones Flores CassenoteACAlex Jones Flores Cassenote
- Mateus de Souza RibeiroMRMateus de Souza Ribeiro
- José Eduardo Lutaif DolciJDJosé Eduardo Lutaif Dolci
- Cesar Eduardo FernandesCFCesar Eduardo Fernandes
Open Access
- 1 January 2026
- journal article
- Published by FapUNIFESP (SciELO) in Revista da Associação Médica Brasileira
- Vol. 72 (9)
Abstract
SUMMARY OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the design and linkage procedures of the Career, Autonomy, Rights and Equity among Doctors Brazil survey coordinated by the Brazilian Medical Association, and to assess the composition and geographic coverage of its analytic sample against national benchmarks. METHODS: This national cross-sectional online survey was conducted from January 29 to September 10, 2026. The invitation frame came from Demografia Médica no Brasil, a census-based investigation of the physician workforce conducted since 2010. Four nonoverlapping random samples totaling 110,000 physicians were invited; participation was voluntary. Survey records were audited, deduplicated, linked to professional sources through a restricted key, compared with 2024 national benchmarks, and calibrated for sex, region, and age group. RESULTS: Of 4,437 submissions, 4,002 physicians formed the analytic sample. Women accounted for 51.6%, mean age was 48.3 years, and 70.9% had at least one recognized specialty, compared with 49.3%, 44.8 years, and 59.1% in the observed 2024 national benchmark. Calibration weights ranged from 0.396 to 3.134; the Kish weight-based design effect was 1.259, and the effective sample size was 3,180. CONCLUSION: Career, Autonomy, Rights and Equity among Doctors Brazil documents a linked physician sample and quantifies differences from national benchmarks. The low matched participation fraction and voluntary response create substantial potential for selection bias. Random invitations, linkage, and calibration do not establish population representativeness or remove unmeasured nonresponse bias. The findings primarily characterize the analytic sample and inform the interpretation of subsequent thematic studies.This publication has 9 references indexed in Scilit:
- How to choose a sampling technique and determine sample size for research: A simplified guide for researchersOral Oncology Reports, 2024
- Gender Disparity in Full Professor Rank Among Academic Physicians: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisAcademic Medicine, 2024
- Evaluation of the reported data linkage process and associated quality issues for linked routinely collected healthcare data in multimorbidity research: a systematic methodology reviewBMJ Open, 2023
- Women representation in academic and leadership positions in surgery in BrazilThe American Journal of Surgery, 2022
- A Consensus-Based Checklist for Reporting of Survey Studies (CROSS)Journal of General Internal Medicine, 2021
- What explains wage differences between male and female Brazilian physicians? A cross-sectional nationwide studyBMJ Open, 2019
- Improving the Quality of Web Surveys: The Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys (CHERRIES)Journal of Medical Internet Research, 2004
- The Ambivalent Sexism Inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1996
- Calibration Estimators in Survey SamplingJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1992