Matching Residents to Pathology Fellowships

Abstract

Mandates for pathology training are a topic sure to surface “hot button” issues whatever the venue or whatever the combination of viewpoints gathered around the water cooler. A national pathology fellowship match administered by the National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) is the latest in a series of controversies affecting residents preparing for a future in our discipline and the programs entrusted with their education and professional development. Crawford and coauthors,1 representing the Association of Pathology Chairs (APC) and its program directors section (PRODS), argue in this issue of the Journal that a pan-pathology fellowship match is the best solution for problems exacerbated by changes in credentialing requirements for board certification in pathology. Other opinion leaders and organizations, including the Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology (ADASP), are unconvinced. The primary rationale for a pan-pathology fellowship match offered by Crawford and colleagues1 is the perception of “widespread dissatisfaction” among affected residents driven primarily by a single event in 2007 at which only a small fraction of the national resident pool was present and fewer still accounted for the residents sufficiently motivated to “overrun” the microphone. More inclusive data drawn from American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP) Resident In-Service Examination surveys showed that, in fact, only a minority of pathology residents were in favor of a fellowship match when asked in 2007 (39%), 2008 (26%), and 2010 (47%).1 Paradoxically, the same survey results showed that a consistent majority supported having a uniform fellowship application timeline. In an independent survey targeting members of the College of American Pathologists (CAP) Residents Forum and the ASCP Resident Liaison Network, only 43% of resident respondents were in favor of a match despite also identifying absence of clear and consistent application deadlines as an issue for fellowship applicants.2 These results resonate …