Changes in position, competencies, and impact variables by predictor variable
Graduates with a medical doctor background or other additional degree appear to be more likely to change leadership after graduation (
P <0.001). Candidates graduating from HSPH, SPHUWC, or UMST appear to be less likely to change leadership than graduates from other institutes (Additional file
4: Table S6). Graduates with an additional degree appear to be somewhat more likely to change technical position. Graduates from HSPH, SPHFU, or UMST appear to be less likely to change technical position than graduates from other institutes (Additional file
4: Table S7). Graduates with an additional degree appear to be more likely to switch to a position involving more responsibility and graduates from INSP and KIT appear to be more likely to switch to a position involving more responsibility than graduates from other institutes (Additional file
4: Table S8).
Not unexpectedly, respondents who graduated fairly recently are less likely to have had an increase in remuneration; on average, they have been on the job market for less time than candidates who graduated before 2008. Men appear to be more likely to have an increase in remuneration than women (
P = 0.005), and graduates from HSPH, SPHFU, or UMST appear to be somewhat less likely to have an increase in remuneration (Additional file
4: Table S9).
Recent graduates appear to be less likely to have switched employer than respondents who graduated before 2008. Furthermore, graduates from HPSH and SPHFU appear to be somewhat less likely to switch to another employer than graduates from other institutes (Additional file
4: Table S10).
Institutional differences were found with regard to MPH contribution to change in leadership, F(5, 303) = 16.217, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.211; change in technical position, F(5, 303) = 19.762, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.237; increase in remuneration, F(5, 303) = 15.822, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.196; and a change in employer, F(5, 303) = 9.983, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.182. With regard to contribution to change in leadership and contribution to change in technical position, graduates from KIT, INSP, and SPHUWC gave significantly higher responses than did graduates from HSPH, SPHFU, and UMST. With regard to MPH contributing to change in remuneration, graduates from KIT and SPHUWC gave significantly higher responses than did graduates from the other four institutions. Finally, with regard to attribution to change in employer, graduates from KIT, SPHUWC, and UMST gave higher responses than respondents from HSPH, SPHFU, and INSP. No other statistically significant predictor variables were found.
Institution also contributed significantly to differences between candidates in reported application of acquired competencies, F(5, 397) = 13.178, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.166, with graduates from KIT, INSP, and SPHUWC responding significantly higher than graduates from HSPH, SPHFU, and UMST. Besides, graduates with a medical doctor background responded significantly higher than graduates without such a background, F(1, 397) = 8.931, P = 0.003, η
2 = 0.022. The same group of institutions (KIT, INSP, and SPHUWC), F(5, 376) = 14.286, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.160, and medical doctor background, F(1, 376) = 10.278, P = 0.001, η
2 = 0.027, significantly contributed to differences in performance at the workplace, with graduates from SPHUWC, INSP, and KIT giving significantly higher ratings than graduates from HSPH, SPHFU, and UMST.
Institution where graduates studied also explained part of the differences between candidates in increased impact on society, F(5, 403) = 11.435, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.124, with graduates from KIT and SPHUWC responding somewhat higher than graduates from other institutions. Furthermore, graduates with an additional degree rated impact higher than graduates without an additional degree, F(1, 403) = 4.681, P = 0.031, η
2 = 0.011.
Finally, split-plot ANOVA suggests that, for all institutions together, the MPH program contributed slightly more to application of competencies to graduates’ performance at the workplace than to their contribution to society, F(1, 373) = 13.863, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.036. However, significant differences between institutions were found with regard to this trend, F(5, 373) = 6.288, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.078. A closer look within institutions reveals that this trend is statistically significant in HSPH, F(1, 108) = 31.738, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.227; SPHFU, F(1, 59) = 4.230, P = 0.044, η
2 = 0.067; and INSP, F(1, 60) = 18.465, P <0.001, η
2 = 0.235; but not in SPHUWC or UMST. Finally, in KIT the trend appears to be reversed in that the difference is not statistically significant, F(1, 72) = 3.561, P = 0.063, η
2 = 0.047.