National Resident Matching Program Research Articles

The HFSA Advanced Heart Failure and Transplant Cardiology Fellowship Consensus Conference

There is waning interest among cardiology trainees in pursuing an Advanced Heart Failure/Transplant Cardiology (AHFTC) fellowship as evidenced by fewer applicants in the National Resident Matching Program match to this specialty. This trend has generated considerable attention across the heart failure community. In response, the Heart Failure Society of America convened the AHFTC Fellowship Task Force with a charge to develop strategies to increase the value proposition of an AHFTC fellowship. Subsequently, the HFSA sponsored the AHFTC Fellowship Consensus Conference April 26–27, 2023. Before the conference, interviews of 44 expert stakeholders diverse across geography, site of practice (traditional academic medical center or other centers), specialty/area of expertise, sex, and stage of career were conducted virtually. Based on these interviews, potential solutions to address the declining interest in AHFTC fellowship were categorized into five themes: (1) alternative training pathways, (2) regulatory and compensation, (3) educational improvements, (4) exposure and marketing for pipeline development, and (5) quality of life and mental health. These themes provided structure to the deliberations of the AHFTC Fellowship Consensus Conference. The recommendations from the Consensus Conference were subsequently presented to the HFSA Board of Directors to inform strategic plans and interventions. The HFSA Board of Directors later reviewed and approved submission of this document. The purpose of this communication is to provide the HF community with an update summarizing the processes used and concepts that emerged from the work of the HFSA AHFTC Fellowship Task Force and Consensus Conference.

Neurological Surgery Residency Programs in the United States: A National Cross-Sectional Survey.

The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education has approved 117 neurological surgery residency programs which develop and educate neurosurgical trainees. We present the current landscape of neurosurgical training in the United States by examining multiple aspects of neurological surgery residencies in the 2022-2023 academic year and investigate the impact of program structure on resident academic productivity. Demographic data were collected from publicly available websites and reports from the National Resident Match Program. A 34-question survey was circulated by e-mail to program directors to assess multiple features of neurological surgery residency programs, including curricular structure, fellowship availability, recent program changes, graduation requirements, and resources supporting career development. Mean resident productivity by program was collected from the literature. Across all 117 programs, there was a median of 2.0 (range 1.0-4.0) resident positions per year and 1.0 (range 0.0-2.0) research/elective years. Programs offered a median of 1.0 (range 0.0-7.0) Committee on Advanced Subspecialty Training-accredited fellowships, with endovascular fellowships being most frequently offered (53.8%). The survey response rate was 75/117 (64.1%). Of survey respondents, the median number of clinical sites was 3.0 (range 1.0-6.0). Almost half of programs surveyed (46.7%) reported funding mechanisms for residents, including R25, T32, and other in-house grants. Residents received a median academic stipend of $1000 (range $0-$10 000) per year. Nearly all programs (93.3%) supported wellness activities for residents, which most frequently occurred quarterly (46.7%). Annual academic stipend size was the only significant predictor of resident academic productivity (R 2 = 0.17, P = .002). Neurological surgery residency programs successfully train the next generation of neurosurgeons focusing on education, clinical training, case numbers, and milestones. These programs offer trainees the chance to tailor their career trajectories within residency, creating a rewarding and personalized experience that aligns with their career aspirations.

Survey of ASCO Sponsored Oncology Interest Groups in the United States Assessing Medical Student Perceptions of Education in Radiation Oncology and Future Employment Prospects

Over the last five years, applications to radiation oncology residency programs among graduates of medical schools in the United States (US) have declined by nearly 50% with a corresponding increase in unfilled positions in the National Resident Matching Program. This has led to ongoing concern regarding the future of the radiation oncology workforce and speculation regarding contributing factors. There are no published data substantiating medical student viewpoints on these issues. To better understand medical student perceptions of oncology specialties (medical oncology (MO), radiation oncology (RO), and surgical oncology/surgical subspecialties (SO)) and factors contributing to their career choices, we conducted a survey among oncology interest groups sponsored by the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO). Survey content emphasized relative impressions of oncology specialties, exposure to these fields during medical school, and perceptions of future employment prospects. An IRB-approved thirty-item questionnaire was distributed electronically via SurveyMonkey to US medical student members of ASCO sponsored interest groups. Participation was optional at the institutional and individual level and responses anonymous. Chi square test or Fisher's exact test was used to compare categorical variables. Two-hundred seventy-nine students completed the survey (37% male, 62% female; 42% White, 40% Asian, 18% underrepresented minorities). Students report receiving less exposure to radiation oncology during medical school: 19% report RO is not included in their curriculum vs. 4% for MO (p<0.01); 77% report receiving lectures from MO faculty, 33% from RO, and 41% from SO (p <0.01); 41% were encouraged to consider RO as a specialty, compared to 62 % for MO and 42% for SO (p < 0.01); 45% report having a clear understanding of role of MO in oncology care vs. only 25% for RO and 38% for SO (p<0.01); 41% saw MO as leaders of the multidisciplinary cancer team, 1 % for RO, and 2% for SO, 47% felt all played equal roles (p<0.01). Students have more negative perceptions of future career prospects for RO: 81% feel that job prospects for MO are strong, 55% for RO and 73% for SO (p<0.01); 54% feel strongly that jobs are available in desirable geographic locations for MO, 36% for RO, 48% for SO (p<0.01); 27% of students report concerns about the future viability of RO, 10% for MO, and 11% for SO (p<0.01). Compared to other oncology specialties, students have less exposure to RO, less understanding of the role of RO in multidisciplinary cancer care, and more pessimism about the future job market/specialty viability. These are likely contributing factors to declining interest in RO among graduates of US medical schools. Current radiation oncologists should increase efforts to improve medical student interest and understanding of RO.

Virtual Interviews During COVID-19 Changed Neurosurgery Match—for Better or Worse

The COVID-19 pandemic forced neurosurgery residency application processes to adopt a virtual interview model. This study analyzes the trends in program and applicant residency match behavior due to virtual interviews. National Resident Matching Program data from Main Residency Match, National Resident Matching Program Director and Applicant Survey, Electronic Residency Application Service, and Charting Outcomes in the Match were collected for neurosurgery residents for all available years, providing information on neurosurgery residency application, interview, and match outcomes. Studied years were dichotomized to account for virtual versus in-person interviews and analyzed for differences. Although the average number of applications received during in-person versus virtual years was not statistically different, 245 versus 290 (P= 0.115), programs interviewed more applicants when interviews were virtual, 37.2 versus 46, (P= 0.008). Similarly, matched U.S. senior applicants did not submit a statistically higher number of applications in person versus virtual, 54 versus 77 (P= 0.055), but they did attend more interviews virtually, 20.5 versus 16.6 (P= 0.013), and ranked more programs, 20 versus 16.2 (P= 0.002). Although White applicants did not have a statistically significant difference in number of applications submitted (55 vs. 68, P= 0.129), Black applicants submitted more applications during virtual match compared with in-person match (52 vs. 74, P= 0.012). The number of applicants that programs needed to rank to fill each position was not statistically different when comparing in-person versus virtually conducted interviews, 4.6 versus 5.4 (P= 0.070). Despite no change in the overall number of applications submitted per applicant, Black applicants submitted more applications virtually, suggesting potential benefits of virtual format for Black applicants. Interview format was strongly correlated to the use of perceived fitness by applicants in rank decision making. Virtual interviews provide major financial advantages to candidates and could help improve Black representation in neurosurgery. However, they impose limitations on ability access fitness.

Gastroenterology fellowship application and match trends in the United States over a 12-year period, 2010 to 2022

Introduction Gastroenterology has recently gained prominence as a competitive internal medicine subspecialty. The intense competition within the gastroenterology fellowship match (GFM) presents challenges for both applicants and programs, particularly in virtual interviews due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. We analyzed the variables impacting GFM competitiveness to provide insights for prospective gastroenterologists and programs to enhance the match process. Methods We used publicly available National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data to examine applications and match data for internal medicine subspecialties from 2010 to 2022. We considered factors such as the number of positions, applicants, and programs, utilizing the specialty competitiveness ratio (SCR) to assess competitiveness. Annual growth rates for positions and applications and average annual growth rates were calculated. Correlation coefficients between annual salaries and SCR were computed using various compensation reports. Results GFM’s competitiveness has increased recently, evidenced by substantial growth in positions (4.61%) and applications (3.81%) since 2010. Gastroenterology ranked as the second-fastest growing specialty in positions and applications. In 2022, GFM ranked fourth in applications (974) and positions offered (616). Among internal medicine subspecialties, gastroenterology exhibited the highest SCR (1.58). Correlation analysis highlighted a positive link between SCR and compensation across specialties. Conclusion The escalating competition within GFM necessitates an expansion of positions to address potential shortages. Complex factors, such as academic interest and financial considerations, require multifaceted strategies to ensure an adequate supply of gastroenterologists. Further research is warranted to examine the long-term consequences of this trend.

The Anesthesiology Physician-Scientist Pipeline: Current Status and Recommendations for Future Growth-An Initiative of the Anesthesia Research Council.

The limited number and diversity of resident physicians pursuing careers as physician-scientists in medicine has been a concern for many decades. The Anesthesia Research Council aimed to address the status of the anesthesiology physician-scientist pipeline, benchmarked against other medical specialties, and to develop strategic recommendations to sustain and expand the number and diversity of anesthesiology physician-scientists. The working group analyzed data from the Association of American Medical Colleges and the National Resident Matching Program to characterize the diversity and number of research-oriented residents from US and international allopathic medical schools entering 11 medical specialties from 2009 to 2019. Two surveys were developed to assess the research culture of anesthesiology departments. National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding information awarded to anesthesiology physician-scientists and departments was collected from NIH RePORTER and the Blue Ridge Medical Institute. Anesthesiology ranked eighth to tenth place of 11 medical specialties in the percent of "research-oriented" entering residents, defined as those with advanced degrees (Master's or PhDs) in addition to the MD degree or having published at least 3 research publications before residency. Anesthesiology ranked eighth of 11 specialties in the percent of entering residents who were women but ranked fourth of 11 specialties in the percent of entering residents who self-identified as belonging to an underrepresented group in medicine. There has been a 72% increase in both the total NIH funding awarded to anesthesiology departments and the number of NIH K-series mentored training grants (eg, K08 and K23) awarded to anesthesiology physician-scientists between 2015 and 2020. Recommendations for expanding the size and diversity of the anesthesiology physician-scientist pipeline included (1) developing strategies to increase the number of research intensive anesthesiology departments; (2) unifying the diverse programs among academic anesthesiology foundations and societies that seek to grow research in the specialty; (3) adjusting American Society of Anesthesiologists metrics of success to include the number of anesthesiology physician-scientists with extramural research support; (4) increasing the number of mentored awards from Foundation of Anesthesia Education and Research (FAER) and International Anesthesia Research Society (IARS); (5) supporting an organized and concerted effort to inform research-oriented medical students of the diverse research opportunities within anesthesiology should include the specialty being represented at the annual meetings of Medical Scientist Training Program (MSTP) students and the American Physician Scientist Association, as well as in institutional MSTP programs. The medical specialty of anesthesiology is defined by new discoveries and contributions to perioperative medicine which will only be sustained by a robust pipeline of anesthesiology physician-scientists.

Key factors for residency interview selection from the National Resident Matching Program: analysis of residency Program Director surveys, 2016-2020.

As the number of medical school graduates continues to outpace the available residency training positions, applying for residency in the United States has become a highly competitive process, often associated with a low rate of selection and invitation for interview. The National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Program Director survey provides data assessing factors considered by Program Directors (PD) in selecting and inviting candidates for interview. Assessing the evolution of these factors over time is efficacious to inform and guide prospective applicants toward improving preparation for residency application. We aim to synthesize NRMP data showing factors that PDs reported and rated as important in their decision to select and invite applicants for interview. Data from residency PD surveys from 2008 to 2021were accessed, but after applying inclusion/exclusion criteria, only the data from 2016 to 2020 were reviewed and analyzed. The NRMP survey reports provided two metrics that characterized PDs' evaluation of the residency factors for interview, namely, "percent citing factor" and "average rating" on a 0 to 5 Likert-type scale. These two metrics were combined into an aggregate measure of importance (AI), and another measure of relative importance (RI) was constructed from normalizing the AI of each individual factor to the sum of the AI within each survey year. The top ranked factors were United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1/Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination (COMLEX) Level 1, Letter of Recommendation (LOR) in the specialty, Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE/Dean's Letter), and USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK)/COMLEX Level 2 Cognitive Exam (CE) score, any failed attempt in USMLE/COMLEX, and perceived commitment to specialty. Factors rising in importance were Audition Elective/Rotation Within Your Department, Personal Statement (PS), Perceived Commitment to Specialty, Perceived Interest in Program, LOR in the Specialty, Other Life Experience, and Personal Prior Knowledge of the Applicant. Factors with declining importance were Interest in Academic Career, Awards or Special Honors in Basic Sciences, Graduate of Highly Regarded US Medical School, Awards or Special Honors in Clinical Clerkships, Lack of Gaps in Medical Education, Awards or Special Honors in Clerkship in Desired Specialty, and Consistency of Grades. Compared to the 2021PD survey, our findings show continued predictive consistency, particularly related to specialty and program commitment. The factors identified for the selection of medical school graduates for interview into a residency program reveal that PDs move toward a more integrated approach. Specifically, PDs are placing increasing emphasis on factors that border on subjective qualities more so than the more traditional, quantitative, and objective metrics. Medical students and educators need to continually apprise themselves of the NRMP data to inform students' preparation endeavors throughout medical school to strengthen their application portfolios and enhance their competitiveness for the matching process.

The Home Program Advantage in the Otolaryngology Residency Match

To evaluate the effect of home residency programs on outcomes in the otolaryngology residency match DESIGN: A retrospective online survey study during the 2015, 2018, 2019, 2020, and 2021 match cycles was conducted. All available otolaryngology residency positions listed by the National Resident Matching Program were compared with publicly available spreadsheets containing the following information: matriculated applicant name, medical school, whether the final match institution was the matriculated applicant's home program (HP), whether the matriculated applicant had completed an away rotation at their final matched institution (designated away institution, AI), or neither (designated Other Institution, OI). Nonclinical survey study using publicly available spreadsheets containing The Match data from 2015 to 2021 located online at Otomatch.com. Newly matched United States otolaryngology-head and neck surgery residents completing the Otomatch.com survey RESULTS: A total of 1771 matched OHNS applicants were identified. Fifty-one percent of students were affiliated with their matched institution, with 25% of students matching at HPs, and 26% matching at AIs. Students with home programs had an increased likelihood of remaining in the same geographic region compared to students without home programs (OR 1.742 95% CI [1.21-2.506], p = 0.003). Applicants with HPs matched at significantly larger residency programs (p < 0.001). This study found that a majority of residents match at an institution with which they were affiliated, either their home program or away institution. Applicants with HPs are more likely to remain in the same geographic region as their medical school, and to match into larger residency programs compared to applicants without HPs.

Evaluating the feasibility of a normalized competitive index (NCI) to assess the competitiveness of general surgery residency

BackgroundGeneral surgery remains the predominant surgical training pathway; however, the trends in competitiveness over time are unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility of using a normalized competitive index (NCI) to assess competitiveness by analyzing 30 years of general surgery match data. MethodsData for general surgery programs were collected using the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Main Residency Match data from 1993 to 2022. Matched applicant metrics from 2007 to 2021 were collected via NRMP Charting Outcomes data. Metrics included USMLE Step 1 and 2 scores, research experiences and output, work experiences, and volunteer experiences. A competitive index was created by dividing number of positions by the match rate each year. The index was normalized, creating the NCI for trends over time. Linear regressions were performed on the NCI, match data, and applicant metrics across time. ResultsThe NCI significantly differed across time (p = 0.02) with an upward-trending NCI slope; however, there were substantial fluctuations over time. The overall match rate increased over time (p<0.001), and applicants per position decreased over time (p<0.001). The USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 scores of matched applicants increased over time (R2=0.92 and R2=0.95, p < 0.001). Research output has tripled over the 2007–2021 period (2.2 vs. 7, p < 0.001). Step 2 and research output correlated with NCI (Pearson r = 0.89 and r = 0.97) but did not correlate with the match rate. ConclusionThe competitiveness of general surgery residency programs was highly variable over time. Over the last ten years, there has been a significant increase in applicants per position and applicant metrics. The fluctuations in standard metrics of competitiveness (i.e., applicants per position, USMLE scores, research output) correlated with fluctuations in the NCI, while the match rate was relatively stable over time. This study demonstrates that the NCI may be a valuable metric for applicants to determine or predict the competitiveness of a residency program.

Unfilled in emergency medicine: An analysis of the 2022 and 2023 Match by program accreditation, ownership, and geography.

The two most recent National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Match cycles saw a high number of initially unfilled emergency medicine (EM) residency positions. We sought to identify the risk of EM residency program characteristics including accreditation duration, primary clinical site ownership status, and geography pertaining to not initially filling all positions. We performed a repeated cross-sectional observational study of EM residency programs participating in the 2022 and 2023 NRMP Match cycles and used publicly available data from the NRMP, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Our primary outcome was the proportion of EM residency programs that did not initially fill positions, with analyses stratified by accreditation duration (>5 or ≤5 years), primary clinical site ownership status, and geographic core-based statistical areas (CBSAs). A total of 219 of 2921 (7.5%) positions in the 2022 Match and 554 of 3010 (18.4%) positions in the 2023 Match were initially unfilled. Over the 2-year period, EM residency programs accredited within the past 5 years had more than double the risk (relative risk [RR] 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.69-2.57, chi-square p < 0.001) of not filling all positions compared to those accredited more than 5 years previously. EM residency programs with a primary clinical site under for-profit ownership had a 50% greater risk of not filling all positions when compared to those under nonprofit or governmental ownership (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.14-1.98, chi-square p = 0.009). In 2023, several CBSAs had a high number of both offered and unfilled positions. EM residency programs accredited within the past 5 years or those with a primary clinical site under for-profit ownership had a greater risk of not filling all positions within the past two Match cycles.

Predictors of Matching into Anesthesiology and Surgery: Analysis of One Program's Results

The objectives of this study were to use a multivariable regression model to determine what application factors made anesthesiology and surgery applicants more or less likely to match into an anesthesiology or surgery residency program. Surgery and Anesthesiology applicants listed on the final National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Rank Order Lists from WMC in the 2020-2021 application cycle were included in analysis. All applicant data were collected through the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS). All ERAS and letters of recommendation (LOR) data were deidentified and LOR were subsequently inputted into a linguistics software to analyze the language use in LOR. Descriptive analyses were conducted to compare variables between applicants that matched to a specific residency program and those who matched elsewhere. A multivariable regression model was then used to determine characteristics of anesthesiology and surgery applicants that were indicative of matching to a specific rank of residency program. A total of 116 anesthesiology and 78 surgery applicants were included in final analysis. Analysis of anesthesiology applicants yielded four significant application characteristics that influenced matching to a higher or lower ranked residency program: USMLE Step 2 CK scores, medical school attended, insight category words in LOR, and anger category words in LOR. Similarly, analysis of surgery applicants yielded four significant characteristics: Race, USMLE Step 1 scores, insight category words, and see category words. Our results demonstrated that specialties of anesthesiology and surgery considered different metrics regarding the residency application process. Among the many factors that were analyzed, USMLE scores and language in LOR were considered significant in both specialties. As the application process continues to evolve, we may see a shift in what application factors are considered more important than others.

Trends in Aesthetic Surgery Fellowship Training: An Analysis of Supply and Demand.

Aesthetic surgery fellowship applications were consolidated under the San Francisco Match in 2018. The impact of these changes on aesthetic program and applicant numbers had not yet been investigated. In this study we sought to evaluate changes in programs, positions, applications, match rates, and fill rates since aesthetic surgery joined the San Francisco Match. We also aimed to compare these trends to craniofacial surgery, microsurgery, and hand surgery fellowships over this same time period. San Francisco and National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) match data for aesthetic, craniofacial, microsurgery, and hand fellowships were obtained from 2018 to 2022, and the number of applications, positions, programs, and successful matches were evaluated. The number of aesthetic fellowship positions increased from 17 to 41 (141%) over the period studied. This resulted in increased match rates and more unfilled positions. Over the same period, fellowship positions for craniofacial, hand, and microsurgery increased by 3.4%, 6%, and 2.5% respectively. There was no increase in applications to any postgraduate subspecialty, nor was there any change in the number of residents pursuing fellowship. Similarly, there was no change in the percentage of fellowship-bound residents applying to any given discipline. The increase in aesthetic fellowship programs and positions did not generate an increase in applications. Applications to other plastic surgery subspecialties also failed to increase. Unlike aesthetic fellowships, their program numbers have remained stable. Given the limited fellowship applicant pool, our focus should be on enhancing the quality of existing aesthetic programs rather than continuing to increase the number of aesthetic positions.

Characteristics of Emergency Medicine Residency Programs With Unfilled Positions in the 2023 Match

The unprecedented number of unfilled emergency medicine post-graduate year 1 (PGY-1) residency positions in the 2023 National Resident Matching Program shocked the emergency medicine community. This study investigates the association between emergency medicine program characteristics and the likelihood of unfilled positions in the 2023 Match. This cross-sectional, observational study examined 2023 National Residency Matching Program data, focusing on program type, length, location, size, proximity to other programs, previous American Osteopathic Association (AOA) accreditation, first accreditation year, and emergency department ownership structure. We constructed a generalized linear mixed model with a logistic linking function to determine predictors of unfilled positions. A total of 554 of 3,010 (18.4%) PGY-1 positions at 131 of 276 (47%) emergency medicine programs went unfilled in the 2023 Match. In our model, predictors included having unfilled positions in the 2022 Match (odds ratio [OR] 48.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 21.04 to 110.15), smaller program size (less than 8 residents, OR 18.39, 95% CI 3.90 to 86.66; 8 to 10 residents, OR 6.29, 95% CI 1.50 to 26.28; 11 to 13 residents, OR 5.88, 95% CI 1.55 to 22.32), located in the Mid Atlantic (OR 14.03, 95% CI 2.56 to 77.04) area, prior AOA accreditation (OR 10.13, 95% CI 2.82 to 36.36), located in the East North Central (OR 6.94, 95% CI 1.25 to 38.47) area, and corporate ownership structure (OR 3.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 9.72). Our study identified 6 characteristics associated with unfilled emergency medicine residency positions in the 2023 Match. These findings may be used to guide student advising and inform decisions by residency programs, hospitals, and national organizations to address the complexities of residency recruitment and implications for the emergency medicine workforce.

USMLE Step 2 CK Scores and Radiology Residency Applications: Does it Affect Diversity in Selection of Trainees?

As residency programs in diagnostic radiology aspire to broaden trainee diversity, reliance on certain criteria may affect the selection of candidates from underrepresented groups. With the conversion of reporting of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores to pass/fail, programs may rely more on numerical USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores. The purpose of our investigation is to assess the effects of Step 2 CK scores on the selection of underrepresented minority (URM) and female candidates. Applications from United States senior allopathic medical students to a radiology residency program from the 2021-2023 National Residency Matching Program cycles were analyzed. Subjects were classified as male or female and URM or non-URM by self-identification. Step 2 CK scores were compared and the use of cutoff scores was examined for disparate effects. 1017 subjects fulfilled the entry criteria. There were 721 males and 296 females, with 164 URM and 853 non-URM candidates. Comparing males to females, there was no significant difference in the mean score (p=0.21) and no disparate effects of cutoff scores. There was a significant difference between the mean score of URM versus non-URM candidates of eight points (p<0.00011). The use of cutoffs showed a disparate effect on URM candidates with a cutoff score of 250 (average score for 2022 matched applicants) excluding 71% of URM candidates while excluding only 46% of non-URM candidates. Reliance on USMLE Step 2 CK scores to screen applications for radiology residency can disadvantage URM candidates. Females are not adversely affected.

A Match Made in Rural: Interpreting Match Rates and Exploring Best Practices.

Although rural family medicine residency programs are effective in placing trainees into rural practice, many struggle to recruit students. Lacking other public measures, students may use residency match rates as a proxy for program quality and value. This study documents match rate trends and explores the relationship between match rates and program characteristics, including quality measures and recruitment strategies. Using a published listing of rural programs, 25 years of National Resident Matching Program data, and 11 years of American Osteopathic Association match data, this study (1) documents patterns in initial match rates for rural versus urban residency programs, (2) compares rural residency match rates with program characteristics for match years 2009-2013, (3) examines the association of match rates with program outcomes for graduates in years 2013-2015, and (4) explores recruitment strategies using residency coordinator interviews. Despite increases in positions offered over 25 years, the fill rates for rural programs have improved relative to urban programs. Small rural programs had lower match rates relative to urban programs, but no other program or community characteristics were predictors of match rate. Match rates were not indicative of any of five measures of program quality nor of any single recruiting strategy. Understanding the intricacies of rural residency inputs and outcomes is key to addressing rural workforce gaps. Match rates likely reflect challenges of rural workforce recruitment generally and should not be conflated with program quality.

REI clinics and fellowship training-a national snapshot to improve access to reproductive care.

To analyze the geographic distribution of REI fellowships and clinics across the USA and to strategize ways to improve patient access to care. Cross-sectional study using population data obtained from publicly available United States Census Bureau, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART), and National Resident Matching Program websites. Outcomes include the number of REI clinics, REI fellowship-trained physicians, and REI fellowship programs. In 2020, there were 643 assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinics reporting to SART and 1351 fellowship-trained REI physicians. Most clinics are located in the south (n = 209); however, the northeast has the highest density of REI clinics. Out of 301,316 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles in the USA in 2020, northeastern states initiated the most cycles (n = 93,565), and Midwestern states initiated the fewest cycles (n = 50,000). The northeast has the most REI physicians per million women aged 20-44 years (42.4) while the Midwest has the lowest ratio (19.5). There are fewer REI physicians per million women aged 20-44 years in states with a lower proportion of patients with health insurance (r = 0.56, 95% confidence interval ([CI] 0.34-0.73) and in states with a lower average income per resident (r = 0.65, 95% CI 0.46-0.79). Most of the 49 accredited REI fellowship programs in the USA are in the northeast (n = 18), and there are fewest in the south (n = 10) and west (n = 10). Access to REI care has large geographic disparities from a clinic, physician, and training program perspective. Creative solutions are needed to remedy this problem.

Comparison of Osteopathic (DO) and Allopathic (MD) Candidates Matching Into Selected Surgical Subspecialties.

Context Medical students and graduates apply for post-graduate year-one positions every year through the Single Accreditation System (SAS) National Residency Match Program (NRMP). New opportunities have arisen for osteopathic graduates through the transition to a single match. There is a paucity of information evaluating the effects of this single match on osteopathic (DO) and allopathic (MD) candidates in relation to match rates in competitive surgical sub-specialties such as neurosurgery, thoracic surgery, vascular surgery, otolaryngology (ENT), plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, and general surgery. Objectives This paper utilizes published data to accomplish three tasks. Firstly, it investigates the effects of the SAS on DO and MD match rates in surgical subspecialties of neurosurgery, thoracic surgery, vascular surgery, ENT, plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, and general surgery. Secondly, it investigates whether program director credentials and impressions correlate with the match rates of DO or MD candidates in each of these specialties. Finally, it discusses solutions for addressing ways to improve match outcomes for all candidates. Methods Previously published NRMP, National Matching Services, and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education websites were queried for the number of DO and MD senior applicants for each position, match success rates, program director impressions, and program director credentials for the years 2018-2023. Match success rates were defined as a ratio of the number of candidates that applied to the number who successfully matched. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-squared testing, student t-tests, and linear regression where appropriate. A p-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. Results From 2020-2023, an increasing proportion of DO residents applied for the selected surgical subspecialties, increasing from 599 applicants in 2020 to 743 candidates in 2023. Overall match rates for DOs remain significantly lower than MD match rates for each of these specialties as well as overall (p-values all <0.05) with summative match rates of 52.89% for DOs compared to 73.61% for MDs in 2023 for the selected surgical subspecialties. From 2020 to 2023 match rates were 30.88% for DOs compared to 74.82% for MDs in neurosurgery, 16.67% versus 46.45% (DO vs MD) in thoracic surgery, 4.17% vs 68.84% (DO vs MD) in plastic surgery, 57.62% vs 73.18% (DO vs MD) in general surgery, 23.21% vs 74.18% (DO vs MD) in vascular surgery, 53.10% vs 72.57% (DO vs MD) for ENT, and 56.92% vs 72.51% (DO vs MD) for orthopedics. There was a statistically significant correlation between the proportion of DO program directors with the rate of DOs matching in the associated specialty (p=0.012). Conclusion There were significantly lower rates for DO candidates compared to MD candidates matching into selected surgical subspecialties of neurosurgery, thoracic surgery, vascular surgery, ENT, plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, and general surgery. This may be addressed through increasing advocacy at local and national levels, improving mentorship, increasing DO medical student exposure to surgical subspecialties, and ensuring increasing selected surgical subspecialty involvement in teaching these diverse DO applicants in order to strengthen medicine and continue to address predicted growing physician shortages.

The Association Between Interview Day and Rank Order in Plastic Surgery Match: Is Recency Effect to Blame?

Plastic and reconstructive surgery is among the most competitive specialties in the National Resident Matching Program match. Though efforts to institute unbiased and equitable measures of an applicant's success have been made, many barriers still hinder suitable applicants from successfully matching. We sought to identify whether interview day influenced applicants' likelihood of being ranked favorably in both independent and integrated plastic surgery residency programs at a single academic institution. Data from 10 years of independent plastic surgery applicants and 8 years of integrated plastic surgery applicants were queried. Data regarding whether applicants were interviewed on day 1, day 2, or during subinternships (integrated cohort only) and what number they were on the programs rank list were included in the analysis. A total of 226 independent applicants 237 integrated applicants were identified. For integrated applicants, those who interviewed on day 1 were weighted toward worse rank scores. Applicants who interviewed during their subinternship had a bimodal distribution either ranking favorably or poorly. Integrated applicants who interviewed on the second day were more likely to be ranked in the first quartile. For those who interviewed on day 1, the odds of being ranked in the last quartile was 2.34 times higher than those who interviewed on day 2 (p = 0.02). Our results demonstrating that interview day may influence an applicant's final rank in the MATCH. Further study is needed to determine if this effect is can be observed in other academic plastic surgery programs.

Assessing the Accuracy of Otomatch.com Data for Individuals Applying to Otolaryngology Residency.

Otomatch.com is an online forum for residency applicants to discuss the otolaryngology match process including academic metrics. The purpose of this study is to assess the accuracy of self-reported match data on Otomatch relative to official data reported by the National Residency Match Program (NRMP) and the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC). Data was collected from publicly editable Otomatch forums (2017-2018, 2018-2019, 2019-2020) and curated Otomatch survey responses (2018-2019, 2019-2020) whose results are released after Match Day. Aggregated data was collected from the NRMP 2018 and 2020 Charting Outcomes in the Match and AAMC Report on Residents (2017-2018, 2018-2019). Measures of interest included Step 1 scores, Step 2 CK scores, publications, number of interview invitations, number of interviews attended, and AOA status. ANOVA and 2 tailed T tests were performed to compare variables within each match year. Average Step 2 CK score was significantly higher on publicly editable Otomatch forums than AAMC in 2017-2018 (257vs 253, P < .05) and 2018-2019 (258vs 252, P < .05). Interviews attended were significantly higher on Otomatch survey responses than the publicly editable forum in 2019-2020 (13vs 9, P-value < .05). Step 1 scores, interview invitations, and AOA status were not statistically significantly different when data was available. Applicant statistics from online forums, online surveys, NRMP, and AAMC are consistent, except for Step 2 CK scores. Self-reported data on the Otomatch forum is an accurate estimate of academic metrics of otolaryngology residency applicants.

Burning Matches: Arguments for Improving the Match Process for Physician Trainee Couples.

Burning Matches: Arguments for Improving the Match Process for Physician Trainee Couples.