Number Of First Author Publications Research Articles

Assessing the impact of Canadian primary care research and researchers: Citation analysis.

To describe the citation impact and characteristics of Canadian primary care researchers and research publications. Citation analysis. Canada. A total of 266 established Canadian primary care researchers. The 50 most cited primary care researchers in Canada were identified by analyzing data from the Scopus database. Various parameters, including the number of publications and citations, research themes, Scopus h index, content analysis, journal impact factors, and field-weighted citation impact for their publications, were assessed. Information about the characteristics of these researchers was collected using the Google search engine. On average, the 50 most cited primary care researchers produced 51.1 first-author publications (range 13 to 249) and were cited 1864.32 times (range 796 to 9081) over 29 years. Twenty-seven publications were cited more than 500 times. More than half of the researchers were men (60%). Most were clinician scientists (86%) with a primary academic appointment in family medicine (86%) and were affiliated with 5 universities (74%). Career duration was moderately associated with the number of first-author publications (0.35; P=.013). Most research focused on family practice, while some addressed health and health care issues (eg, continuing professional education, pharmaceutical policy). Canada is home to a cadre of primary care researchers who are highly cited in the medical literature, suggesting that their work is of high quality and relevance. Building on this foundation, further investments in primary care research could accelerate needed improvements in Canadian primary care policy and practice.

Gender Bias in Letters of Recommendation: Relevance to Urology Match Outcomes and Pursuit of Fellowship Training/Academic Career

To review applications to a single urology residency program to determine application characteristics predictive of (1) successful match into urology residency and (2) pursuit of fellowship training and/or academic practice after completion of residency. Our principal variables of interest were gender bias as assessed in letters of recommendation (LOR), personal statements, Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE), race, and gender. Applications submitted to our urology residency program in the 2014 cycle were reviewed. Twenty-three variables were analyzed, including applicant demographics, application materials, and gender bias. Deidentified text from LOR, personal statements, and MSPE was evaluated for gender bias using an open-source gender bias calculator. A subanalysis of applicants who matched at a top 25 urology program was performed. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify applicant variables associated with (1) match success and (2) fellowship training or academic employment as of September 2021. Two hundred and twenty-two completed applications were analyzed. First authorship of a published manuscript was significantly associated with greater odds of matching. Female gender and top 25 medical school attendance were both significant predictors of matching at a top 25 urology program. The number of first-author publications was associated with completion of fellowship training or current employment in an academic position. First-author publications are the most important preinterview determinant of match success and subsequent pursuit of academic practice/fellowship training. Certain applicant characteristics are associated with matching at highly ranked programs. Gender bias in application materials (including LOR) does not appear to exert a significant influence on match and early career outcomes.

Evaluating the Outcomes and Trainee Performance of a Canadian Medical Imaging Clinician Investigator Program.

Purpose: To measure the research productivity of trainees from the University of Toronto's Medical Imaging Clinician Investigator Program (MI-CIP) and comparing it with the research productivity of trainees from MI-non-CIP and General Surgery (GSx) Clinician Investigator Program. Methods: We identified residents who completed an MI-CIP, MI-non-CIP and GSx-CIP from 2006-2016. In each group of trainees, we assessed 3 research productivity outcomes with non-parametric tests before residency and at 7years post-CIP completion/post-graduation. Research productivity outcomes include the number of total publications, the number of first-author publications, and the publication's average journal impact factor (IF). Results: We identified 11 MI-CIP trainees (male/female: 9 [82%]/2 [18%]), 74 MI-non-CIP trainees (46 [62%]/28 [38%]) and 41 GSx-CIP trainees (23 [56%]/18 [44%]). MI-CIP trainees had statistically significant higher research productivity than MI-non-CIP in all measured outcomes. The median (interquartile range, IQR) number of total publications of MI-CIP vs MI-non-CIP trainees was 5.0 (8.0) vs 1.0 (2.0) before residency and 6.0 (10.0) vs .0 (2.0) at 7years post-CIP completion/post-graduation. The median (IQR) first-author publications of MI-CIP vs MI-non-CIP trainees was 2.0 (3.0) vs .0 (1.0) before residency and 2.0 (4.0) vs (.0) (1.0) at 7years post-CIP completion/post-graduation. The median (IQR) average journal IF of MI-CIP vs MI-non-CIP trainees was 3.2 (2.0) vs .3 (2.4) before residency and 3.9 (3.2) vs .0 (2.6) at 7years post-CIP completion/post-graduation. Between MI-CIP and GSx-CIP trainees, there were no significant differences in research productivity in all measured outcomes. Conclusion: MI-CIP trainees actively conducted research after graduation. These trainees demonstrated early research engagement before residency. The similar research productivity of MI-CIP vs GSx-CIP trainees shows initial success of MI-CIP trainees.

Gender and Race Discrepancies in Resident Research Output at a Tertiary Care Center [ID: 1374349

INTRODUCTION: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires residents to complete scholarly activity prior to graduation, but this does not necessarily translate into peer-reviewed publications. However, level of scholarly activity has been directly linked to successful fellowship match, and those who identify as women, African American, Hispanic, or Native American (underrepresented in medicine [URiM]) are not well represented in fellowship positions. We therefore evaluated for race and gender-based discrepancy in scholarly activity as it relates to research involvement. METHODS: An IRB-approved (#15746) survey was sent to all residents at a tertiary hospital. This survey asked residents to share demographic information, when they got involved with research, number of first-author articles, and experience with presentations. Chi-square analysis was used. RESULTS: Analysis demonstrated that women began researching earlier than men (P=.0027). However, this did not translate to a significant increase in poster presentations (P=.270), oral presentations (P= .0522), or number of first-author publications (P=.492). When broken down by race, URiM men were exposed to research later than White men, White women, and URiM women (P<.005). There was no difference in poster presentations (P=.350) or first-author publications (P=.718), but White and URiM men had more experience giving oral presentations at conferences compared to their female colleagues (P<.005). CONCLUSION: The responses demonstrate that there is not a lack of involvement in research leading to less research output. In fact, despite earlier introduction to research, women have similar research outcomes as their peers. Therefore, effort needs to be placed on ensuring access to resources that assist with publishing research.

Correlation Between Research Productivity During Medical School and Radiation Oncology Residency

This analysis investigates whether research productivity during medical school predicts future research productivity during radiation oncology residency. At our institution, there have been 20 medical students who graduated between 2005 and 2015 and subsequently completed their residency training in radiation oncology. We built a database of all PubMed-indexed publications in which these former students were the first author or coauthor. Mean publication rates with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were computed. The paired t test and McNemar-Bowker test of symmetry were used to examine differences in first-author and coauthor publications between the medical school and residency periods. An ordinal logistic regression model was employed to measure the odds ratio of publishing during residency versus during medical school. A Spearman correlation coefficient was calculated for the relationship between the number of publications during medical school and the number during residency. A total of 14 and 60 first-author publications (46 and 117 coauthor publications) were identified for 20 individuals during medical school and residency, respectively. There was an average of 0.7 (95% CI, 0.17-1.23) first-author publications during medical school and 3.08 (95% CI, 1.56-4.44) first-author publications during residency (P=.003). Only 15% (3/20) had ≥2 publications during medical school, and 50% (10/20) had ≥2 publications during residency (P=.012). The Spearman correlation coefficient between research publications before and during residency was .457 (P=.043). The mean number of coauthor publications during medical school and residency was 2.3 (95% CI, 0.92-3.68) and 5.85 (95% CI, 3.50-8.20), respectively (P=.004). Based on this retrospective analysis from our institution, student research productivity during medical school, as defined by the number of first-author publications, does correlate with future research productivity during radiation oncology residency.

The use of radar plots with the Yk-index to identify which authors contributed the most to the journal of Medicine in 2020 and 2021: A bibliometric analysis.

A consensus exists that the first author and corresponding author make the most contribution to the publication of an article. The Y-index has been proposed to assess the scientific achievements of authors, institutions, and countries/regions (AIC/R for short) based on the number of first-author publications (FPs) and corresponding-author publications (RPs). Nonetheless, the Y-index is defined in terms of count and radian (represented by j and h) instead of using the relative radius and angle degree to simplify understanding. In the literature, a method for drawing radar diagrams online with the Y-index is also lacking. This study was conducted to enhance the Y-index with an additional relative radius denoted by k and the angle degree represented by h* (named Yk-index), include easy-to-use features (e.g., copying and pasting) for the delivery of the online Radar-Yk, and identify which one of AIC/R contributed the most to a scientific journal. From the Web of Science (WoS) database, we downloaded 9498 abstracts of articles published in the journal of Medicine (Baltimore) in 2020 and 2021. Three visual representations were used, including a Sankey diagram, a choropleth map, and a radar diagram, to identify the characteristics of contributions by AIC/R to Medicine (Baltimore) using the Yk-index (j, k, h*). A demonstration of Rada-Yk with easy-to-use features was given using the copy-and-paste technique. We found that Qiu Chen (China), Sichuan University (China), China, and South Korea (based on regions, e.g., provinces/metropolitan areas in China) were the most productive AIC/R, with their Yk equal to 27,715, 12415.1, and 2045, respectively; a total of 85.6% of the published articles in Medicine (Baltimore) came from the 3 countries (China, South Korea, and Japan); and this method of drawing the Radar-Yk online was provided and successfully demonstrated. A breakthrough was achieved by developing the online Radar-Yk to show the most contributions to Medicine (Baltimore). Visualization of Radar-Yk could be replicated for future academic research and applications on other topics in future bibliographical studies.

Predictors of future academic productivity in pediatric otolaryngology fellowship applicants

ObjectivesTo investigate which components of pediatric otolaryngology fellowship applications are more closely predictive of future academic productivity in applicants who go on to complete their fellowship training. MethodsApplications to our institution's ACGME accredited pediatric otolaryngology fellowship program through the SF Match program for the years 2011–2016 were reviewed. Applicant files on record were utilized to extract independent variables including sex, mean USMLE score, residency program Doximity ranking, military experience, number of national honors/awards, AOA status, total number of publications listed on application, number of first author publications listed on application, and AAOHNS Committee involvement. Academic productivity was determined by number of PubMed indexed publications per year, practice setting, and H-index (Scopus). Statistical analysis consisted of multivariate and univariate regression models, with p < 0.05 being considered statistically significant. ResultsMultivariate regression showed that USMLE Step 1 and 2 mean score and number of publications listed on application exhibited statistically significant correlations with a higher number of future post fellowship publications per year. Residency program Doximity rank, applicant number of awards and honors, AOA status, and number of first author publications were not predictive of future academic productivity. No statistically significant associations were found between any variables and the faculty position outcome variable. ConclusionsQuantifiable criteria in pediatric otolaryngology fellowship applications, such as number of listed publications and mean USMLE scores are strongly correlated with future academic productivity metrics.

Impact of Longitudinal Focused Academic Time on Resident Scholarly Activity

Meeting the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education scholarly activity requirement can be challenging for residents. Time to engage in research is one of the commonly perceived barriers. To address this barrier, our residency program implemented a focused academic time initiative of a half day per week that can be taken while on rotation. At the end of the third year of implementation, we assessed the effectiveness of this initiative on the productivity of resident scholarly activity. Radiology resident scholarly activity submitted to the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education web-based Accreditation Data System were reviewed and compared to the three academic years before (July 1, 2012-June 30, 2015) and three academic years after (July 1, 2015-June 30, 2018) implementing the focused research time. The types of scholarly activity, which consisted of peer-reviewed journal publications, national conference presentations, and textbook chapters were captured. PubMed-Indexed for MEDLINE (PMID) number was used to confirm publications. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data. The total number of residents per year, ranging between 37-40, was similar between the academic years 2012-2015 (116 residents total) and 2015-2018 (117 residents total). After initiating focused academic time, the number of publications increased from 45 to 75 (67%), presentations at conferences increased from 112 to 128 (14%), the number of textbook chapters increased from4 to 15 (275%), and total number of first author publications by residents increased from 21 to 28 (33% increase). Longitudinal focused academic time of half a day per week increased productivity of scholarly activity among our radiology residents.

The 2020 Evidence-based Promotion Ladder of Academic Plastic Surgery

PURPOSE: Metrics were evaluated between academic plastic surgeons from different tiered training programs to determine promotion predictors within tiers and between tiers for those seeking promotion from assistant, associate, to professors. METHODS: A cross-sectional online review was performed to collect 61 variables from full-time plastic surgeon faculty affiliated with United States residency training programs during the 2020–2021 academic year. Surgeons were stratified into nine cohorts for comparison by professorship (assistant, associate, professor) and Doximity ranked institution program tiers (Tier 1 = T1, Tier 2 = T2, Tier 3 = T3). Univariate, followed by multivariate regressions with reciprocal transformation were performed to determine predictors more likely associated with promotion. RESULTS: Ninety-eight programs included 851 surgeons. T1/T2/T3 surgeons promoted: more years in practice (P = 0.002; P < 0.001; P < 0.001), greater number of last author publications (P < 0.001; P < 0.001; P = 0.007). T1/T3 surgeons promoted: higher h-indexes (P = 0.001; P = 0.002). T1 surgeons promoted: on journal editorial board (P = 0.040). T2 surgeons promoted from assistant to associate: non-White race (P = 0.010). T3 surgeons promoted: residency director (P = 0.009) and greater number of citations (P = 0.026). Promoted from assistant, associate, professor between T3/T2/T1 programs: greater number of last author publications (P = 0.007; P = 0.002; P < 0.001). Promoted from assistant and associate between T3/T2/T1 programs: plastic surgery department (P = 0.002; P < 0.001). Promoted from assistant between programs: attended Top 10 US News medical school (P = 0.012), attended better Doximity ranked research program (P < 0.001), greater number of first author publications (P = 0.017), greater number of citations (P = 0.023). Promoted from associate between programs: attended better Doximity ranked reputation program (P = 0.017), higher h-indexes (P = 0.017). Promoted from professor between programs: received any AAPS award (P = 0.039), greater number of AAPS awards (P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Promotion predictors provided evidence to synthesize the Promotion Ladder of Academic Plastic Surgery.

Experiences in academic publication among ENT trainees in the UK: results from a national survey

This study aimed to provide an objective means of identifying patterns in academic publication among ENT trainees during their higher surgical training. A cross-sectional survey was distributed to ENT higher surgical trainees. A total of 153 ENT specialty trainees participated, giving a response rate of 46.5 per cent. Across all years of training, the mean number of first author publications was three and the mean number of non-first author publications was two. For trainees at specialty trainee year 8 level, these figures were nine and five, respectively. Participants with doctoral degrees and those in academic programmes published more papers but the mean difference was only significant for the doctoral subgroup (p < 0.0001). Those with additional undergraduate degrees and those in less than full-time training had an overall lower number of publications. Participants in the current survey achieved a higher average number of academic publications than is presently required to successfully complete higher surgical training in ENT. It is hoped that these results act as a guide for trainees planning the research component of their training to ensure that they remain competitive at consultant interview.

Objective Resident Characteristics Associated with Performance on the Ophthalmic Knowledge Assessment Program Examination.

Background To determine objective resident characteristics that correlate with Ophthalmic Knowledge Assessment Program (OKAP) performance, as well as to correlate OKAP performance with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestone assessments, written qualifying examination (WQE) scores, and oral board pass rates. Methods Review of administrative records at an ACGME-accredited ophthalmology residency training program at an urban, tertiary academic medical center. Results The study included data from a total of 50 resident physicians who completed training from 2012 to 2018. Mean (standard deviation) OKAP percentile performance was 60.90 (27.51), 60.46 (28.12), and 60.55 (27.43) for Years 1, 2, and 3 examinations, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences based on sex, marital status, having children, MD/PhD degree, other additional degree, number of publications, number of first author publications, or grades on medical school medicine and surgery rotations. OKAP percentile scores were significantly associated with United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores (linear regression coefficient 0.88 [0.54-1.18], p = 0.008). Finally, continuous OKAP scores were significantly correlated with WQE ( r s = 0.292, p = 0.049) and oral board ( r s = 0.49, p = 0.001) scores. Conclusion Higher OKAP performance is correlated with passage of both WQE and oral board examinations during the first attempt. USMLE Step 1 score is the preresidency academic factor with the strongest association with success on the OKAP examination. Programs can utilize this information to identify those who may benefit from additional OKAP, WQE, and oral board preparation assistance.

Coaching tailored by stages: A valuable educational strategy to achieve independence in research.

This study presents an individualized coaching approach tailored to the stages of proximity of promising scientists interested in becoming independently funded researchers in the context of a minority-serving institution. This strategy defined the participant's stage of proximity by their number of first-author publications in peer-reviewed journals and their track record in submitting research grants. We argue that coaching tailored by stages is an asset to maintain the enthusiasm, persistence, and positive attitude of promising scientists as they try to reach independent investigator status. Furthermore, this valuable educational approach supports the development of management and leadership skills in defined scientific domains.

Promoting Leadership by Women in Gastroenterology—Lessons Learned and Future Directions

Promoting Leadership by Women in Gastroenterology—Lessons Learned and Future Directions

The Otolaryngology Match: A Bibliometric Analysis of 222 First-Year Residents.

Research has long been acknowledged as important to successfully matriculate into an otolaryngology residency position. The objective of this study is to perform a bibliometric analysis to quantify the importance of scholarly productivity in the otolaryngology match process. Retrospective database review. A list of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited otolaryngology residency programs were identified. Websites of programs were reviewed to identify first-year otolaryngology residents for the 2016 to 2017 academic year and compared to two previous academic years. Research output measures were collected. Residencies were tiered 1 to 5 by departmental research output. Two hundred twenty-two records of first-year otolaryngology residents starting residency in 2016 were identified. After adjusting for number of total publications, number of original research articles, number of review articles, number of case reports, number of first author publications, number of otolaryngology-related publications, highest journal impact factor, average journal impact factor, and years since publication, h-index and number of total publications were associated with increasing tier of matriculation based on research output (P < .0001). Only number of publications correlated with increasing h-index (B = 1.11). With regard to applicant trends, there has been an increase in scholarly productivity as measured across all research parameters in the past 3 years. Research is an important component of successfully matriculating into an otolaryngology residency program. The h-index is a reliable tool to quantify research output and predict the tier of matriculation with regard to institutional research output. There has been a steadily increasing level of scholarly output among applicants in the past 3 years. NA Laryngoscope, 129:1561-1566, 2019.

Publication Productivity of Early-Career Orthopedic Trauma Surgeons

The goals of this study were to: (1) define the publication productivity of early-career orthopedic trauma surgeons over time; (2) compare the early-career publication productivity of recent orthopedic trauma fellowship graduates vs their more senior colleagues; and (3) determine the proportion of fellowship graduates who meet the Orthopaedic Trauma Association (OTA) publication criteria for active membership early in their careers. Orthopedic trauma fellowship graduates from 1982 to 2007 were analyzed. A literature search was performed for each fellow's publications for the 6-year period beginning the year of fellowship graduation. Publication productivity was compared between early and recent groups of graduates, 1987 to 1991 and 2003 to 2007, respectively. Fulfillment of OTA publication criteria was determined. Seventy-nine percent of graduates contributed to 1 or more publications. The recent group produced more total publications per graduate (4.06 vs 3.29, P=.01) and more coauthor publications (2.60 vs 2.04, P=.019) than the early group. The number of first-author publications did not differ between groups (1.46 vs 1.25, P=.26). A greater percentage of the recent group met current OTA publication criteria compared with the early group (51% vs 35%, P=.04). The findings showed that recent orthopedic trauma graduates had increased publication productivity compared with their more senior colleagues, although a proportion had not qualified for active OTA membership 6 years into their career. Overall, these data are encouraging and suggest that young orthopedic trauma surgeons remain committed to sustaining a high level of academic excellence.

Adding authorship order to the quantity and quality dimensions of scholarly productivity: evidence from group- and individual-level analyses

The purpose of this study was to determine whether authorship order--as measured by first author publications, citations to first author publications, and the first author h-index--plays a significant role in scholarly productivity. Scholarly productivity was assessed in this study with publications from 2011 to 2014 and citations to these publications as indexed by the Thomson Web of Science. Using a correlational design, a group-level analysis of 36 Ph.D.-granting departments of criminology and criminal justice revealed that ratings from a U.S. News & World Report (USN&WR) survey correlated significantly better with aggregate program first author publications than with aggregate program total publications, although citations to first author publications and the first author h-index failed to correlate significantly better with the USN&WR than citing articles to total publications and the total publication h-index, respectively. An individual-level correlational analysis of all 228 full professors from 44 programs offering a Ph.D. in criminology/criminal justice showed that time until promotion to full professor displayed a significantly stronger inverse correlation with the number of first author publications, the number of citations to first author publications, and the first author h-index than with the total number of publications, the number of citing articles to total publications, and the total publication h-index, respectively. Hence, at both the group and individual levels first author publications and at the individual level citations to first author publications and the first author h-index provided a better estimate of scholarly productivity than their respective total publication counterparts.

Top cited articles in adsorption research using Y-index

A bibliometric index called Y-index (j, h) is developed, taking the prominent first author and corresponding author positions into account for evaluation and comparison of scientific productivity. Y-index contained two parameters: publication performance j, which is related to publication quantity, and publication character h, which describes the proportion of corresponding author publications (RP) to first author publications (FP). The top cited articles with at least 100 citations from 1900 to 2012 were selected to examine the Y-index for the evaluation. Y-index and three indicators, number of total publications, FP and RP, were compared. The main contributors of authors, institutions and countries and their contribution characters were revealed by Y-index. Results showed that the topmost authors were more likely to being designated as the corresponding authors, and their contribution characters varied widely. Most institutions and countries had a balance of FP and RP. Y-index that accredits the important collaborators with weighted and comprehensive credit might be a better choice for the evaluation.

A Fellow’s Perspective on Beginning a Satisfying Career in Academic Medical Toxicology

A Fellow’s Perspective on Beginning a Satisfying Career in Academic Medical Toxicology

In-training Factors Predictive of Choosing and Sustaining a Productive Academic Career Path in Neurological Surgery

Factors during neurosurgical residency that are predictive of an academic career path and promotion have not been defined. To determine factors associated with selecting and sustaining an academic career in neurosurgery by analyzing in-training factors for all graduates of American College of Graduate Medical Education (ACGME)-accredited programs between 1985 and 1990. Neurological surgery residency graduates (between 1985 and 1990) from ACGME-approved training programs were analyzed to determine factors associated with choosing an academic career path and having academic success. Information was available for 717 of the 720 (99%) neurological surgery resident training graduates (678 male, 39 female). One hundred thirty-eight graduates (19.3%) held full-time academic positions. One hundred seven (14.9%) were professors and 35 (4.9%) were department chairs/chiefs. An academic career path/success was associated with more total (5.1 vs 1.9; P < .001) and first-author publications (3.0 vs 1.0; P < .001) during residency. Promotion to professor or chair/chief was associated with more publications during residency (P < .001). Total publications and first-author publications were independent predictors of holding a current academic position and becoming professor or chair/chief. Although male trainees published more than female trainees (2.6 vs 0.9 publications; P < .004) during training, no significant sex difference was observed regarding current academic position. Program size (≥ 2 graduates a year; P = .02) was predictive of an academic career but not predictive of becoming professor or chair/chief (P > .05). Defined in-training factors including number of total publications, number of first-author publications, and program size are predictive of residents choosing and succeeding in an academic career path.

Analysis of the pediatric surgery match: factors predicting outcome

Applicants in the NRMP for pediatric surgery have little objective data available regarding factors predicting successful matching. We analyzed data from applicants at our institution to attempt to identify parameters correlated with three outcomes: successfully matching, or attaining either a top ten or top three ranking in our final submitted match list. After IRB approval, we reviewed ERAS documents for all applicants (n = 146) over 3 years (candidates for the 2007, 2008, and 2009 fellowship years). An interview was offered to 75% of the applicants (Table 1). We analyzed over 20 factors; including demographics, number of publications and first author publications, number of book chapters, national presentations, prior match attempts, advanced degrees, quality of recommendation letters, and ABSITE scores. Significant variables were evaluated with multiple logistic regression analysis to identify independent predictors. Variables correlated with successful outcome for each of the three endpoints are shown in Table 2. The number of peer-reviewed publications and first author publications, and AOA membership were highly correlated with a favorable outcome for all three endpoints. High ABSITE scores were significantly correlated with top ten rank. Research experience and outstanding letters of recommendation were significantly associated with a top ten ranking and overall match success. Variables associated only with overall match success included number of book chapters, graduation from a US medical school, quality of recommendation letters, and being granted an interview at our institution. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated no independent factors for overall match success; number of publications was significant for both top ten and top three ranking (P = 0.006 for each); number of first author publications (P = 0.002) and AOA membership (P = 0.03) were independent predictors for top three ranking. Applicant variables associated with success in the match included quality of letters, number and type of publications, research experience, graduation from a US medical school, and AOA membership. Factors not correlated with outcome included advanced degrees (PhD, Masters), other fellowship training, and community-based versus university-based residency training. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated no independent factors for overall match success.