Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Applicants Research Articles

Relation of Doximity ranking and matched applicant characteristics in orthopedic residency programs

Orthopedic surgery residency applicants often turn to data from many online ranking platforms to select programs. The purpose of this study was to determine if programs belonging to different Doximity ranking groups and US geographical regions favor certain applicant characteristics in order to give prospective residents more data to make informed application decisions. 2019 Doximity rankings and matched applicant data from the 2019 Association of American Medical Colleges Residency Navigator were collected and used to determine differences among matched applicant characteristics in Doximity ranking groups and US regions. Matched applicants from the top Doximity ranking group had, on average, significantly more peer-reviewed publications than those of any other ranking group. Among US regions, matched applicants in South Atlantic programs had, on average, significantly fewer peer-reviewed publications than those in Mid Atlantic programs. Residents at South Atlantic programs spent a significantly higher percentage of their first-year training in ambulatory community settings than those in Mid Atlantic, Pacific, or East North Central programs. In conclusion, Doximity ranking is associated with certain applicant qualities more than others, and applicants can use the information in this study to strategically apply to institutions with similar training and educational goals.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process.

Over recent months, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has swept the world as a global pandemic, largely changing the practice of medicine because it was previously known. Physician trainees have not been immune to these changes—uncertainty during this time is undeniable for medical students at all levels of training. Of particular importance is the potential impact of COVID-19 on the upcoming residency application process for rising fourth-year students; a further source of added complexity in light of the newly integrated allopathic and osteopathic match in the 2020 to 2021 cycle. Owing to the impact COVID-19 could have on the residency match, insight regarding inevitable alterations to the application process and how medical students can adapt is in high demand. Furthermore, it is very possible that programs will inquire about how applicants spent their time while not in the hospital because of COVID-19, and applicants should be prepared to provide a meaningful answer. Although competitive at a basal level, the complexity of COVID-19 now presents an unforeseen, superimposed development in the quest to match. In this article, we aim to discuss and provide potential strategies for navigating the impact of COVID-19 on the residency application process for orthopaedic surgery.

The Current Status of Medical School Clerkship Grades in Residency Applicants.

BackgroundTwo criteria that have been investigated for evaluating orthopedic surgery residency candidates are achieving an “honors” grade during a surgery clerkship and the total number of honors grades received in all clerkships. Unfortunately, the rate of honors grades given and the criteria for earning an honors grade differ between medical schools, making comparison of applicants from different medical schools difficult.ObjectiveWe measured the rate of honors grades in clerkships at different medical schools in the United States to examine the utility of clerkship grades in evaluating orthopedic surgery residency applicants.MethodsAdequate data via the Electronic Residency Application Service were available for 86 of 142 Association of American Medical Colleges medical schools from the 2017 Match cycle. Descriptive statistics and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were performed to identify differences in grade distributions within each clerkship and in school ranking for research by U.S. News & World Report.ResultsFor the surgery clerkship, the median rate of honors grades given was 32.5% (range 5%–67%). There was a high rate of interinstitutional variability in all clerkships. We were unable to demonstrate a statistically significant relationship between research ranking and percentage honors grades given for individual clerkships.ConclusionsA standardized method for grading medical students during clinical clerkships does not exist, resulting in a high degree of interinstitutional variability. Surgery clerkship grades are an unreliable measure for comparing orthopedic surgery residency applicants from different medical schools. Standardized measures of applicant evaluation might be helpful in the future.

Unifying the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process Under a Single Accreditation System: A Primer.

In 2020, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Osteopathic Association will merge creating a single accreditation system for graduate medical education in the United States under the National Residency Match Program. The goal of this merger is to ensure nationwide consistency in purpose and practice of medical care in the United States, specifically in the context of residency education and training for the next generation of physicians. The proposed impact is still speculative since we do not know what lasting effects, if any, this merger will have on subspecialties such as orthopaedic surgery. There are many considerations that medical school advisors need to take into account when guiding their students applying to residency after the match merge. The newly unified accreditation system will pose additional competition, considering that there will be more applicants than spots available in competitive specialties, including orthopaedic surgery. These are important caveats to keep in mind as the residency application process is evolving actively. It is the authors' hope that concepts discussed in this article stimulate further discussion, catalyze research, and optimize the ability for students to succeed in the match process.

Current Trends in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Applications and Match Rates.

The current U.S. orthopaedic residency application process is becoming increasingly impersonal in the wake of an increasing number of applications. Through an analysis of orthopaedic surgery residency application statistics, we have highlighted the effect that the number of orthopaedic applications has on match rate, and we have suggested methods for a more personalized application process. Data from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) and the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) for United States orthopaedic residency applicants from 2008 to 2018 were collected. These data included the average number of applications submitted per applicant, the average number of applications received per program, the total number of residency positions offered in the U.S., the total number of U.S. applicants, and the total number of U.S. applicants who matched to a U.S. orthopaedic surgery residency program. U.S. applicant match rates and the average number of applications received per residency position offered were calculated. Linear regression models were used to determine the rate at which these variables changed over time. The average number of applications submitted by an applicant increased from 46.5 in 2008 to 74.9 in 2018. The average number of applications received per residency position offered increased from 54.1 in 2008 to 85.7 in 2018. The number of U.S. applicants was 740 in 2008 and 849 in 2018. The number of U.S. orthopaedic residency programs only slightly increased from 160 in 2008 to 171 in 2018. The match rate for U.S. medical school applicants has remained stable from 2008 to 2018 at a mean of 76.9% and a standard deviation of 2.3%. The match rate has remained stable from 2008 to 2018 despite an increase in the number of applications per position. This discrepancy suggests that increasing the number of submitted applications may not correlate with applicant success. We address this discrepancy and suggest methods that can potentially allow for a more targeted orthopaedic application experience.

Characterization and Fate of Unpublished Research Articles Reported by Orthopedic Surgery Residency Applicants

As the competitiveness of matching to an orthopedic residency continues to increase, applicants attempt to bolster their application by participating in research activities. However, due to the brief duration of medical school, applicants' articles may not be published at the time of applying. The purpose of this study was to identify projects that were listed under "publications-other than published" within Electronic Residency Application System (ERAS) applications of prospective orthopedic surgery residents to determine the rate and time of these projects to future publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Program directors can use this information to help interpret the importance of such articles on the applications of future residency candidates. Retrospective study of prospective residents' applications to a single orthopedic residency program during the 2014 to 2015 application cycle were reviewed to identify articles designated as "other than published." Articles which advanced to official publication were confirmed using the Embase, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases. Applicant and article characteristics were recorded to identify variables associated with an increased proportion of articles that were able to be confirmed. Prospective residents to a single orthopedic residency program during the 2014 to 2015 application cycle. A total of 1957 article titles were listed amongst 563 applicants, with 48% of applicants (n = 271) having at least one peer-reviewed article listed as "other than published." Overall, 34.2% (709) of the articles were designated as being unpublished including 208 listed as accepted/in-press and 501 listed as submitted/under review. Of the accepted/in-press articles, 90.7% (n = 189) were able to be confirmed as successfully published papers, compared to 63.4% (n = 318) of articles designated as submitted/under review (p < 0.001). Factors predictive of articles which advanced to official publication were being accepted/in-press at the time of applying, a lower United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 score, and articles on orthopedic topics. Nearly one-half of orthopedic residency applicants report unpublished research articles on their ERAS application. While 90.7% of the articles listed as being accepted/ in press were eventually published, less than two-thirds of the articles designated as being in submission/under-review progressed to official publication.

Critical Assessment of the Contemporary Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process

Matching into orthopaedic surgery residency in the United States has become an increasingly competitive process because of the large number of well-qualified applicants. Over the past several years, applicants have sought to maximize their chances of matching by submitting an increasing number of applications. The purpose of this study was to assess trends in application numbers, applicant qualifications, and application reviews, with the goal of obtaining data to help inform future improvements in the orthopaedic surgery residency application process. Applicant data were obtained from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS, www.aamc.org/services/eras/stats) and the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP, www.nrmp.org/report-archives). These included residency application data from 2000 to 2017. In addition, we analyzed available NRMP Applicant Survey Reports between 2008 and 2017, Program Director Survey Reports between 2008 and 2016, and NRMP's Charting Outcomes in the Match between 2006 and 2016. The number of U.S. senior medical student applicants per orthopaedic surgery residency position was stable from 2000 to 2017 (1.13 vs. 1.16 for 2000 and 2017, respectively). A significant increase in the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step-1 and Step-2 scores and self-reported research activity was present over the same time period. The number of applications submitted per applicant significantly increased, by 71.7%, from 48.4 in 2006 to 83.1 in 2017. Additionally, applications per program increased 46.4% from 457 in 2010 to 669 in 2016. In 2010, programs performed in-depth reviews for 54% of applications; however, in 2016, in-depth reviews had decreased to 45% of applications. Orthopaedic residency applicant USMLE scores and research productivity have increased over time. Concurrently, the average number of applications submitted per applicant has increased, with the average applicant applying to nearly half of all orthopaedic residency programs. Consequently, programs have seen more than double the number of applications over this study period. The accompanying decline in the proportion of applications undergoing in-depth review, along with the applicant and program resources associated with these changes, warrants the development of strategies to enhance the efficiency of the application process for orthopaedic residency.

Revisiting the Gender Gap in Orthopaedic Surgery: Investigating the Relationship Between Orthopaedic Surgery Female Faculty and Female Residency Applicants.

Although women now constitute approximately half of all graduating medical students, orthopaedic surgery continues to lag behind in its ability to recruit female applicants. One hypothesis for this discrepancy is the lack of female faculty mentors at academic institutions. The three objectives of this study were the following: (1) to quantify the proportion of female orthopaedic surgery residency applicants, (2) to quantify the proportion of female orthopaedic surgery faculty, and (3) to investigate the relationship between female orthopaedic surgery faculty at an academic institution and the corresponding number of female orthopaedic surgery residency applicants. Data from the Association of American Medical Colleges from 2005 to 2014 were used to calculate the number of medical school graduates, the number of orthopaedic surgery residency applicants, and the number of orthopaedic full-time faculty in the United States. Institutions were excluded if they had incomplete data. A Spearman rank correlation was used to assess for a correlation between the 9-year total number of female orthopaedic surgery applicants and the average number of female orthopaedic surgery faculty members. A total of 101 U.S. medical schools were included in the final analysis. During the period examined, women accounted for 48.7% of medical school graduates, 14.9% of orthopaedic surgery applicants, and 13.2% of full-time orthopaedic surgery faculty. The percentage of female residency applicants increased from 13.91% in 2005 to 2006 to 16.02% in 2013 to 2014 while the percentage of female faculty increased from 12.26% in 2005 to 2006 to 15.79% in 2013 to 2014. No correlation was found between the average number of female orthopaedic surgery faculty at an institution and the total number of female orthopaedic surgery applicants from that institution during the study period examined (Rho, 0.0176; P = 0.5957). The data presented in this study failed to demonstrate a relationship between the number of female faculty and the number of women who apply into orthopaedic surgery, which highlights the complex nature of this issue. More research is needed to examine factors influencing the recruitment of female medical students.

Objective Predictors of Grit, Self-Control, and Conscientiousness in Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Applicants.

The purpose of this study was to identify objective predictors of grit, self-control, and conscientiousness in orthopaedic surgery residency applicants. The following attributes were assessed in 455 applicants: grit, self-control, conscientiousness, consistency of interest, perseverance of effort, and ambition. These measures were correlated with standard, objective demographics obtained during the application process. Alpha Omega Alpha status, additional degrees, and number of publications did not predict any of the studied attributes. Grit increased with age (P < 0.001) but decreased with increasing board scores (P = 0.004). Former collegiate athletes demonstrated greater grit (P < 0.001), consistency of interest (P = 0.007), perseverance (P = 0.006), and self-control (P = 0.019). Female applicants demonstrated more grit (P = 0.044), consistency of interest (P = 0.003), and conscientiousness (P = 0.029) than males. Applicants with military experience had increased ambition (P = 0.033) and conscientiousness (P = 0.001). Overall, orthopaedics applicants possess increased grit compared with the general public, and a number of objective variables reliably predicted the studied attributes. Level III, Cross-sectional study.

Scientific publication misrepresentation among orthopaedic residency applicants

BackgroundThe predictors of erroneous publication reporting among orthopaedic surgery residency applicants have not been established. MethodsA retrospective analysis of the reported scholarly activity of candidates who applied to our orthopaedic surgery department for a first-year residency position in 2017 was conducted to determine the incidence of scientific publication misrepresentation and analyze its association with pre-residency criteria. ResultsOut of 510 candidates, 264 (51.8%) applicants included accepted, in-press, or published scholarly activity on their resumes. The incidence of misrepresentation was 20.5%, and did not differ statistically based on the candidates’ academic performance (United States Medical Licensing Examination – USMLE – steps 1 and 2 scores), Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) membership, immigration status, or or additional academic degrees (p > 0.05). ConclusionsMisrepresentation is a persistent problem among residency training program applicants, and did not correlate with an applicant's academic performance, AOA membership, immigration status, or additional advanced academic degrees.

Update on Misrepresentation of Research Publications Among Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Applicants.

Our 2 previous studies (1999, 2007) examining misrepresentation of research publications among orthopaedic residency applicants revealed rates of misrepresentation of 18.0% and 20.6%, respectively. As the residency selection process has become more competitive, the number of applicants who list publications has increased. The purpose of this study was to determine current rates of research misrepresentation by orthopaedic surgery applicants. We reviewed the publication listings and research section of the Common Application Form from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) for all applicants applying to 1 orthopaedic residency program. The PubMed-MEDLINE database was principally used to search for citations. The PubMed Identifier (PMID) number was used; if no PMID number was listed, a combination of authors or the title of the work was used. If the citations were not found through PubMed, a previously developed algorithm was followed to determine misrepresentation. Misrepresentation was defined as (1) nonauthorship of a published article in which authorship was claimed, (2) claimed authorship of a nonexistent article, or (3) self-promotion to a higher authorship status within a published article. Five hundred and seventy-three applicants applied to our institution for residency in 2016 to 2017: 250 (43.6%) of 573 applicants did not list a publication, whereas 323 (56.4%) of 573 applicants listed ≥1 publication. We found 13 cases of misrepresentation among a total of 1,100 citations (1.18% in 2017 versus 18.0% in 1999 and 20.6% in 2007, p < 0.001). Ten cases of misrepresentation were self-promotion to a higher authorship status. There were 2 cases of claimed authorship of an article that could not be found. Only 1 applicant misrepresented more than once. Based on our findings, orthopaedic surgery residency applicants are accurately representing their publication information. The incorporation of the PMID number on the ERAS application has streamlined the process for finding publications, and has possibly encouraged veracity on residency applications. Faculty involved in the resident selection process should be aware of the significant decline in the rate of misrepresentation by medical students applying for orthopaedic surgery residency versus the rate in our prior studies.

The Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application Process: An Analysis of the Applicant Experience.

Orthopaedic surgery residency positions are highly sought after. The purpose of this survey study was to report the following components of the applicant experience: (1) the number of programs to which applicants applied and interviewed, (2) the performance criteria associated with receiving interviews, (3) the way applicants respond to e-mail interview offers, (4) the pre- and post-interview communication between applicants and programs, (5) the importance of interview day activities and the determinants of the applicant rank order list (ROL), and (6) the financial cost of the application process. An online survey was administered and entirely completed by a representative sample of 100 orthopaedic surgery residency applicants for the 2015 to 2016 cycle during the 3-week period between the last interview of the application season and the deadline for ROL certification. The survey included 45 questions: 7 for background, 7 for competitiveness, 15 for the interaction between applicants and programs, 15 for the importance of interview day experience and the determinants of the applicant ROL, and 1 for the cost of attending each interview. Students applied to 83 ± 27 programs, received 17 ± 10 interviews, and attended 12 ± 5 interviews. Interview offers correlated with, in descending order, Alpha Omega Alpha status, Step 2 Clinical Knowledge, and Step 1. The mean time to reply of interview offer was 17 minutes, yet 25% of the applicants lost at least one interview despite having at least one other person monitor the applicant's e-mail account. Applicants and programs frequently contacted each other to express interest. Although evaluating current residents was the most valuable aspect of interview day to applicants, the strongest determinants for applicants' ROLs were location and surgical experience, with research the least important factor. The cost of interview season was >$7,000 per applicant, excluding away externships. Applying to orthopaedic surgery residency is a complex, competitive, and costly experience for applicants. The application process may benefit from better expectation management of applicant candidacy and a more prohibitive communication policy between applicants and programs after the interview day.

Geographic Trends in the Orthopedic Surgery Residency Match.

Residency program location may be an important factor for orthopedic surgery residency applicants. More than half of residents locate their practice near the site of their training, and surgical specialties (eg, otolaryngology, plastic surgery, and general surgery) have shown geographic patterns in their residency matches. We analyzed geographic trends in the orthopedic surgery Match. Hometown, undergraduate institution, and medical school "preresidency locations" of all allopathic, nonmilitary, orthopedic surgery residents were recorded from program websites for the 2015-2016 academic year. Program and preresidency locations were coded according to state and US census division. Statistical analysis was used to investigate associations between residency program locations and preresidency locations. Of 2662 residents in the study, 1220 of 2614 (47%), 536 of 1329 (40%), and 308 of 744 (41%) matched into the same division as their medical school, undergraduate institution, and hometown, respectively. There were significant differences among divisions (P < .001). Also, 817 of 2662 (31%), 319 of 1329 (24%), and 200 of 770 (26%) residents matched in the same state as their medical school, undergraduate institution, and hometown, respectively, with significant differences between states for medical school (P < .0001) and undergraduate institution (P < .0001), but not hometown (P = .22). Overall, 21% of residents (538 of 2612) matched at the program affiliated with their medical school. There is an association among hometown, undergraduate institution, and medical school for the training program location in which orthopedic surgery residents match, with variability in locations matched at state and census division levels.

Psychomotor Testing for Orthopedic Residency Applicants: A Pilot Study

The purpose of this study was to develop an objective motor skills testing system to aid in the evaluation of potential orthopedic residents. Participants attempted a battery of 5 motor skills tests (4 novel tests and the Grooved Pegboard [GPT] Test) in one 10-minute session. A percentile-based scoring system was created for each test based on raw scores. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare testing scores among 3 cohorts. Each novel test and overall scores were compared with GPT scores as a relative measure of validity. The 2015 orthopedic surgery residency interview season at an academic institution. Thirty orthopedic residents and 72 nonresidents (15 community volunteers and 57 orthopedic surgery residency applicants). Overall, residents performed better than nonresidents (p < 0.0001) and applicants performed worse than residents or volunteers (p < 0.0001). There were positive correlations between the GPT score and overall battery score (r = 0.63), screw and nut test (r = 0.40), and mimic a structure test (r = 0.26). The fracture reduction test and drilling test scores did not correlate to performance on the GPT. Psychomotor testing for surgical applicants is an area in need of study. This investigation successfully piloted a novel battery of tests, which is easily reproducible and thus may be feasible for use in the orthopedic surgery residency interview setting. Longitudinal evaluation is required to explore correlation with future operative skill.

Academic Characteristics of Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Applicants from 2007 to 2014.

Based on a relatively stable match rate, several authors have concluded that the competition for orthopaedic residency positions has not changed over the past 3 decades. However, the objective measures of applicant competitiveness have not been quantified in detail. National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data from 2007 to 2014 for U.S. orthopaedic surgery applicants were compared with data for applicants to all specialties. Trends in the United Stated Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step-1 and Step-2 scores, publications and research experiences, Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) status, and the presence of an advanced degree are reported. From 2007 to 2014, the match rate for orthopaedic surgery applicants remained stable near 80% (p = 0.14). For orthopaedic applicants who matched, the mean USMLE Step-1 scores increased from 234 points in 2007 to 245 points in 2014 (p = 0.005), and the mean scores increased from 220 points in 2007 to 229 points in 2014 for all applicants (p = 0.019). The mean USMLE Step-2 scores of orthopaedic applicants who matched increased from 235 points in 2007 to 251 points in 2014 (p = 0.005), and the mean scores of all applicants increased from 225 points in 2007 to 242 points in 2014 (p = 0.002). The mean number of research publications, presentations, and abstracts reported by orthopaedic applicants who matched more than doubled from 3.0 in 2007 to 6.7 in 2014 (p = 0.02) and increased less dramatically for all applicants from 2.2 in 2007 to 4.2 in 2014 (p = 0.004). The percentage of orthopaedic applicants elected to AOA or with advanced degrees did not significantly change (p > 0.2). Although orthopaedic applicants with AOA status experienced a very high match rate (97.1% in 2014), those with advanced degrees experienced match rates similar to or slightly lower than the applicant pool (73.7% in 2014). The USMLE Step-1 and 2 scores of U.S. orthopaedic surgery residency applicants have increased significantly from 2007 to 2014. Additionally, the number of publications and presentations reported by orthopaedic applicants has more than doubled. These factors signal an increasing level of academic accomplishment in orthopaedic surgery applicants despite a consistent match rate.

Orthopedic Surgery Applicants: What They Want in an Interview and How They Are Influenced by Post–Interview Contact

Common strategies for orthopedic residency programs to attract competitive applicants include optimizing the interview day and contacting favorably ranked applicants postinterview. The purpose of this work was to determine (1) applicants' perspectives on the ideal interview day, (2) how frequently applicants are contacted postinterview, and (3) the influence of this contact on rank order lists (ROL). Prospective Comparative Survey Mayo Clinic Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rochester, MN, USA PARTICIPANTS: A survey was completed by 312 successfully matched orthopedic surgery residency applicants following the 2015 match regarding their views of the ideal interview day, components they valued most, post-interview contact, and how that contact influenced their ROL. Applicants stated they preferred interviews that lasted 15 (55%) minutes, a mean of 1.7 (range: 1-5) interviewers present per interview, 5 total interviews (range: 1-10) in a day, an interview with residents (96%), and interviews days lasting only a half day (88%). The majority (94%) desire a social event attended by only residents (54%) or staff and residents (46%). Few wanted an assessment of surgical skills (36%) or orthopedic knowledge (23%). The interview day was rated very valuable in determining their ROL (4.4 out of 5.0). Applicants told a mean of 1.7 (range: 0-11) programs they were "ranking the program highly" and 0.8 (range: 0-5) programs they were "going to rank them #1." Of the 116 (40%) applicants contacted by programs following interviews, 24 (21%) moved programs higher and 3 (3%) moved programs lower on their ROL. Orthopedic Surgery applicants have clear preferences for what they consider to be the ideal interview day and many alter their ROL following post-interview contact. These data may be beneficial to programs looking to optimize the interview experience for applicants.

Assessment of moral reasoning skills in the orthopaedic surgery resident applicant.

Assessing orthopaedic surgery residency applicants is a complex process. One important applicant characteristic not commonly measured during the interview process is moral behavior, a key component of the guidelines of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education for professionalism competency. We sought to determine whether a relationship exists between the results of residency selection interviews, as measured by match rank order, and moral reasoning skills, as measured by the revised version of the Defining Issues Test (DIT-2). The DIT-2, a psychological tool that has been validated in assessing moral reasoning in >30,000 subjects, was administered to orthopaedic surgery residency candidates on a voluntary basis during their interview day. Data were collected annually from four applicant classes (2009 to 2012) at one institution. Each candidate was interviewed by an orthopaedic faculty team and was ranked comparatively with the other interviewing applicants. The five-part aggregate interview method for ranking applicants for the match list included a focused interview station presenting ethical dilemmas as one part of determining rank order. One hundred and twenty-four fourth-year medical students interviewing for orthopaedic surgery residency were assessed with the DIT-2. The results from the DIT-2 produced a postconventional score, which correlates with various levels of moral development. Each applicant's postconventional score was then compared with the patient's overall rank order. Applicants had highly variable moral reasoning skills, with no relationship to the final rank list. Despite a wide range of DIT-2 scores, the interview process did not differentiate applicants based on moral reasoning skills. It remains unclear whether the DIT-2 could (or should) be used as an additional data point to help stratify orthopaedic residency applicants and to predict their performance.

Overview of the Military Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Application and Selection Process

The military offers eight Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited orthopaedic surgery programs with 33 total positions. The Army has 19 orthopedic surgery residency positions and averaged 1.47 applicants per position from 2007 to 2011. Applicants most commonly become eligible for military orthopaedic surgery residency through attendance of the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences or participation in the Health Professions Scholarship Program. The Military Operational Data System begins registration on July 1st of the preceding year and is used to match all applicants. The ranking and selection of applicants from medical school is based 50% upon objective criteria regarding the applicant's medical school performance and 50% on the applicant's potential for successful practice as an orthopaedic surgeon. Medical school performance data examined include medical school transcript, Dean's letter, and United States Medical Licensing Examination steps I and II/Comprehensive Osteopathic Medical Licensing Examination of the United Sates I and II scores. Determination of an applicant's potential is based upon letters of recommendation, personal interviews, and most importantly the applicant's performance on military orthopaedic surgery clinical clerkships. Applicants who have completed an internship are similarly scored with points awarded for internship and operational tour performance.

Follow-up on Misrepresentation of Research Activity by Orthopaedic Residency Applicants

In our previous study, published in 1999, we showed that 18% of research citations listed as published by orthopaedic residency applicants were misrepresented. Since our last report, we sought to determine whether there had been any change in the behavior of applicants wishing to pursue the field of orthopaedic surgery. We evaluated the research citations that were identified after a review of the Publications section of the Common Application Form from the Electronic Residency Application Service for all applicants to our orthopaedic residency program for 2005 and 2006. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were established for citations listed on candidate applications. Citations were required to be from journals listed in Ulrich's Periodicals Directory. The PubMed-MEDLINE database engine was used to search for citations. If searching failed to yield the cited publication, a review of the journal of alleged publication was undertaken and an interlibrary search was conducted with the use of several research databases. When no match was found, the citation was labeled as misrepresented. Misrepresentation was defined as either (1) nonauthorship of an existing article or (2) claimed authorship of a nonexistent article. One hundred and forty-two (35.9%) of 396 applicants during the 2005 and 2006 application periods listed publications. A total of 304 citations were claimed from these 142 applicants. Listings included articles that were in press or in print (thirty-four citations), articles in journals not found in Ulrich's Periodicals Directory (twenty-eight citations), book chapters (twenty-three citations), and articles recorded as having been submitted (eighty-eight citations). These 173 works were excluded from our analysis. One hundred and thirty-one citations were referenced as appearing in journals per our search criteria, and all were verified. Twenty-seven or 20.6% (95% confidence interval, 14.2% to 28.7%) of 131 citations were misrepresented. The prevalence of misrepresented research publications from orthopaedic surgery residency applicants increased modestly to 20.6% compared with that found in our original report (18%). As we recommended in our last report, we strongly urge residency programs to require applicants to submit reprints of their publications with their residency applications. Perhaps standardized guidelines should be developed to help to prevent misrepresentation through the Electronic Residency Application Service.

What Attributes are Necessary to Be Selected for an Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Position: Perceptions of Faculty and Residents

Orthopaedic surgery has an extremely competitive residency selection process. The authors discuss which attributes of an orthopaedic surgery residency applicant are the most important in obtaining a position. A comparison of applicants' opinions to those of faculty was also done. Anonymous questionnaires were filled out by orthopaedic surgery residency applicants and faculty orthopaedists at teaching institutions. The most important attributes to obtaining a residency were performance on a local rotation (externship), class rank, and interview performance according to faculty. Applicants thought performance on local rotation, United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scores, and letters of recommendation were the three most important. Both groups ranked research participation, gender, and race as the three least important attributes.