US Allopathic Medical Schools Research Articles

Pilot study exploring the presence of leadership curricula in undergraduate medical education

IntroductionThe physician’s role in the healthcare delivery system extends beyond patient care to include numerous critical leadership roles in healthcare. In addition to treating patients, physicians manage multidisciplinary teams and...

Practical Tips for Undergraduate Medical Education Advisors in Residency Application Signaling.

The residency application process has become increasingly complex for medical students and advisors to navigate. Program signaling was piloted to improve applicants' abilities to obtain interview offers at programs they were strongly interested in. The initial positive results led to expansion of signaling to additional specialties over the next two application cycles. Despite the benefits of program signaling, the variation in signaling practices among specialties has presented challenges for both advisors and students when determining how to best allocate signals. The aim of this study is to identify students' perceptions of the signaling process, how this may impact outcomes, and to guide future educational programming. This is an exploratory original survey study of students in a US allopathic medical school applying in ERAS for the 2023 residency cycle. The survey was developed to determine students' understanding of how programs would use signals in the application process and assess strategies students used to allocate signals. We compared program signals to student interview offers and match outcomes using descriptive statistics. 57 of 96 eligible students completed the survey. 51% signaled a range of programs based on their perceived competitiveness for the program while 40% signaled programs of interest regardless of perceived competitiveness. 53% of students thought sending a signal would increase their chance of an interview, while 42% were unsure how the signal would be used by residency programs. Students received interviews at 49% of the programs signaled, which increased to 56.5% when specialties offering more than 7 signals were excluded. 35% of students matched at a signaled program. Students' perceptions and strategies related to the signaling process are varied and may impact interview offers. Advisors should monitor and review internal institutional trends to help inform future educational programming to optimize signal allocation for their students.

A Game-Based Tool for Reducing Jargon Use by Medical Trainees.

Physicians can be unaware that many US adults have intermediate or lower health literacy. Avoiding medical jargon in patient communication can improve poor outcomes associated with lower health literacy, but physicians may struggle to do so as health literacy education is neither standardized nor universal at US allopathic medical schools. As with other skills-based proficiencies in medical education, repeat exposure and active learning help build competency. Medical students developed the Patient Communication Challenge (PCC), an adaptation of the Hasbro game Taboo, to facilitate practice of patient-centered communication skills among medical trainees. Hour-long workshops were held for groups of preclinical medical students. Students watched a communication exemplar video, played the PCC game, and completed a postworkshop survey. To play, two teams competed to earn points by identifying medical concepts as explained by a teammate who described the term without using medical jargon. Evaluations indicated that the game was enjoyable and reinforced didactic concepts through active learning, with self-reported participant satisfaction and competency gain. Overall, 59% of participants (53 of 90) completed postworkshop surveys; 91% (48 of 53) agreed they felt more proficient in avoiding jargon, 94% (50 of 53) would recommend the workshop to a classmate, and 100% (53 of 53) would play again. The PCC can help early medical trainees develop health communication skills through gamification with utilization of adult learning principles and adequate frequency for skill retention. Future applications include longitudinal assessment and expanding to later stages of medical training and other health professions.

Knowledge, perceptions, interest, and use of integrative medicine among U.S. allopathic medical students

Background: Acceptance, interest, and demand for Complementary Integrative Medicine (CIM) has been steadily growing within the US. Yet despite increased use, patient non-disclosure and physician lack of comfort in discussion is common. Medical students (MS) express interest in CIM. Educational exposure affects attitudes, cultural competence, interprofessional education, knowledge, and clinical skills. A few studies include US MS; however, most studies have been done outside the US. Aims: Our study examined first year US allopathic MS knowledge, perception, and attitudes toward IM for patient care, current personal use, and modalities of interest. Methods: The study was conducted on first year MS from 2020-2022 who participated in a 3-hour IM session within the required Essential Principles of Medicine course at a US allopathic medical school. Five questions were disseminated through Poll Everywhere during a lecture given by an IM board certified physician and students were invited to respond. Questions assessed student definition of IM, perception of patient barriers in discussing IM, perception of physician barriers in discussing IM, personal use, and modalities of interest. Results: MS attitude toward IM was generally positive based on word choice. MS perception of patient barriers in discussing IM focused on emotional factors rather than knowledge and understanding, whereas medical student perception of physician barriers revolved around lack of familiarity, knowledge, and training. Students self-reported physical activity and sleep as the top ranked favorite stress-reducing self-care practice followed by cooking/eating, music, and yoga. Students were most interested in exploring pet therapy, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and yoga. Conclusions: Further study with the integrative medicine attitude questionnaire (IMAQ) is recommended to determine whether results are generalizable. Integrating IM education and experience into the conventional medical curriculum is of interest to allopathic US MS and may prepare students for optimizing future patient care as well as clinician wellness.

Prevalence of visual art education in medical school curricula: a national survey of US medical schools

ABSTRACT Background: The Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) has recommended integrating medically-relevant arts and humanities curricula into medical student education in order promote physician skills development. An analysis of the state of existing visual arts-based medical school pedagogies was conducted to inform future implementation strategies. Methodology: An electronic survey was distributed to representatives of US medical schools to describe the prevalence and characteristics of visual arts-based medical school curricula. Official courses, informal events, cross-registration opportunities, and established art museum partnerships were assessed. Results: Survey response rates were 65% for US allopathic medical schools and 56% for osteopathic medical schools. A majority (79%) of responding institutions incorporate or support medical student art experiences in some format. Thirty-one percent (n = 36) of schools offer stand-alone humanities courses using visual arts. These were primarily allopathic programs (n = 35; 37% of allopathic programs) and only one responding osteopathic program (n = 1; 5% of osteopathic programs). Schools without dedicated courses are less likely to report other curricular and extracurricular visual arts engagement. Most visual art medical courses are offered at medical schools located in the Northeastern United States. Conclusions: Many but not all medical schools are incorporating the visual arts into their medical education curriculum. Opportunities to promote increased uptake, more effective implementation, and collaboration strategies for the AAMC recommendations are proposed.

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.

Medical Student Mentorship in the COVID-19 Era.

The Covid-19 pandemic led to a reduction of in-person, guided mentorship due to social distancing and an emphasis on virtual meetings. The effect of these changes on medical students' experiences and specialty choice has yet to be studied in a large-scale manner. To determine the perspective of third- and fourth-year medical students regarding the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mentorship. The authors distributed a modified Likert scale questionnaire (score: 1-10) to assess responses. Third- and fourth-year medical students at two large US allopathic medical schools. Responses to each survey item were analyzed to characterize the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mentorship relationships in medical school. A score of 1-5 was considered "disagree" and a score of 6-10 was considered "agree." A total of 144 responses were collected with a response rate of 16.2%. Overall, 80.6% (n = 116) of respondents agree that the COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on their medical school experience. Nearly half (41.0%, n = 59) expressed concern over the lack of mentorship opportunities, and 66.0% (n = 95) reported that the pandemic has made it more difficult to form or maintain connections with their mentors. Importantly, 43.6% (n = 61) of respondents reported that having close mentoring relationships reduced the impact of the pandemic on their medical training. While many respondents (79.9%, n = 114) did not change career plans due to the pandemic, most students are concerned about evaluating prospective residency programs (88.9%, n = 128). Notably, M3s have much lower confidence than M4s in their ability to choose a specialty (5.9 vs. 8.2, p = 6.43e - 08). This investigation illustrates the concerns that medical students have regarding access to mentorship opportunities due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We hope that these findings encourage medical schools to evaluate and expand their current mentorship programs. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-023-01838-4.

Assessing opportunities for formal exposure to clinical neurosurgery within United States allopathic medical education curricula.

The objective of this study was to evaluate opportunities for early clinical exposure to neurosurgery at US allopathic medical schools and to assess associations between early exposure and recruitment into neurosurgery. The authors conducted a standardized review of online curriculum documentation for all US allopathic medical schools, including descriptive review of opportunities for clinical neurosurgical training among medical students. Chi-square analysis was used to compare baseline characteristics of institutions. Logistic regression was performed to assess factors predictive of early exposure to clinical neurosurgery, defined as completion of a formal rotation at least 6 months prior to Electronic Residency Application Service submission. Among 155 allopathic US medical schools, 143 are fully accredited by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education. Eleven schools have no affiliated hospitals with a neurosurgery practice, and 26 do not have an American Association of Neurological Surgeons (AANS) medical student chapter. Overall, 94 (60.6%) have a traditional preclinical curriculum lasting 21-25 months, 50 (32.3%) offer an intermediate preclinical period of 15-20 months, and 11 (7.1%) report a short preclinical curriculum of 12-14 months. Early formal exposure to clinical neurosurgery was offered by 113 schools (72.9%). Early clinical exposure to neurosurgery was associated with a short (100%) or intermediate (76%) preclinical curriculum, as compared with a traditional curriculum (68.1%; p = 0.066). Early exposure was significantly associated with a shorter preclinical curriculum (OR 0.784, p = 0.005). AANS medical student chapters were present at a high majority of schools with early exposure (OR 4.114, p = 0.006). Medical schools with a higher percentage of graduating medical students matching into neurosurgery were associated with a shorter preclinical curriculum length (β = -0.287, p < 0.001), were more commonly private medical schools (β = 0.338, p < 0.001), and had early clinical exposure to neurosurgery (β = 0.191, p = 0.032). Early exposure to clinical neurosurgery is available at most US allopathic medical schools and is associated with shorter preclinical curricula and institutions with AANS medical student chapters. Medical schools with a higher proportion of medical students entering neurosurgery had a shorter preclinical curriculum length and early clinical exposure to neurosurgery. Further study is recommended to characterize the impact of early exposure on long-term pedagogical outcomes.

Prevalence of Disability and Use of Accommodation Among US Allopathic Medical School Students Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic

This survey study assesses self-disclosures of disability, disability types, and accommodation needs reported by US allopathic medical schools in 2021 vs 2015 and 2019.

A 5-point framework for students evaluating plastic surgery research fellowship opportunities

An increasing number of medical students pursue research fellowships to enhance their odds of matching into an integrated plastic surgery residency program. 1 Keane C.A. Akhter M.F. Sarac B.A. Janis J.E. Characteristics of Successful Integrated Plastic Surgery Applicants from US Allopathic Medical Schools without a Home Integrated Program. J Surg Educ. 2022; 79: 551-557https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsurg.2021.11.002 Crossref Scopus (11) Google Scholar , 2 Pathipati A.S. Taleghani N. Research in Medical School: A Survey Evaluating Why Medical Students Take Research Years. Cureus. 2016; 8e741https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.741 Crossref Google Scholar , 3 Mehta K. Sinno S. Thanik V. Weichman K. Janis J.E. Patel A. Matching into Integrated Plastic Surgery: The Value of Research Fellowships. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019; 143: 640-645https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000005212 Crossref PubMed Scopus (56) Google Scholar The American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons (ACAPS) Job Board lists research fellowship positions for the following academic year from November to March annually. 4 American Council of Academic Plastic Surgeons . Job Board. Available at 〈https://acaplasticsurgeons.org/jobs/〉. Accessed January 16, 2023 Google Scholar Zimmerman et al. also developed a database of plastic surgery research fellowships and their requirements. 5 Zimmerman C.E. Humphries L.S. Taylor J.A. Equitable Access to Research Opportunities in Plastic Surgery: Development of a Research Fellowship Database. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021; 148: 1087e-1088ehttps://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000008535 Crossref Scopus (1) Google Scholar As students select amongst these positions it may be difficult to identify one that matches their goals and interests. The following viewpoint describes a five-part framework of important concerns research year candidates should consider when seeking placement to ensure a high-yielding experience (Figure 1). This framework includes expressing interest to a specific program, attaining funding, maximizing research productivity, creating meaningful mentorship connections and improving skills as a future resident through clinical opportunities.

An Elite Privilege: Top-Ranked Medical Schools Provide Fewer Comparative Performance Data on Their Students.

The objective of this study was to determine differences in the reporting of performance data on medical student performance evaluations (MSPEs) by medical school ranking. MSPEs from all US allopathic and osteopathic medical schools received by a single diagnostic radiology residency program during the 2021-2022 application cycle were retrospectively reviewed. Preclinical class and core clerkship grades were categorized as pass/fail or multitiered. Comparative summative assessments provided in the MSPEs were recorded. Medical schools were grouped by their US News & World Report rankings, and the proportion of reported performance metrics for each group was compared. Information from 95% of US allopathic medical schools (148 of 155) and 73% of osteopathic medical schools (27 of 37) was collected, on the basis of 1,046 applications received. For preclinical classes, multitiered grading was reported by no schools ranked in the top 10, 17% of schools ranked 11th to 50th, 52% of schools ranked 51st to 100th, and 59% of unranked schools (P < .001). For core clinical clerkships, multitiered grades were reported by 70% of the top 10 ranked schools, 90% of schools ranked 11th to 50th, 94% of those ranked 51st to 100th, and 94% of unranked schools (P= .0463). Comparative summative assessments were reported by none of the top 10 ranked schools, 56% of schools ranked 11th to 50th, 80% of those ranked 51th to 100th, and 81% of unranked schools (P < .001). Higher ranked medical schools are less likely to provide comparative assessment data on their MSPEs, which may disadvantage students from lower ranked medical schools.

US Medical School Admissions Leaders’ Experiences With Barriers to and Advancements in Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Despite decades-long calls for increasing racial and ethnic diversity, the medical profession continues to exclude members of Black or African American, Hispanic or Latinx, and Indigenous groups. To describe US medical school admissions leaders' experiences with barriers to and advances in diversity, equity, and inclusion. This qualitative study involved key-informant interviews of 39 deans and directors of admission from 37 US allopathic medical schools across the range of student body racial and ethnic composition. Interviews were conducted in person and online from October 16, 2019, to March 27, 2020, and analyzed from October 2019 to March 2021. Participant experiences with barriers to and advances in diversity, equity, and inclusion. Among 39 participants from 37 medical schools, admissions experience ranged from 1 to 40 years. Overall, 56.4% of participants identified as women, 10.3% as Asian American, 25.6% as Black or African American, 5.1% as Hispanic or Latinx, and 61.5% as White (participants could report >1 race and/or ethnicity). Participants characterized diversity broadly, with limited attention to racial injustice. Barriers to advancing racial and ethnic diversity included lack of leadership commitment; pressure from faculty and administrators to overemphasize academic scores and school rankings; and political and social influences, such as donors and alumni. Accreditation requirements, holistic review initiatives, and local policy motivated reforms but may also have inadvertently lowered expectations and accountability. Strategies to overcome challenges included narrative change and revision of school leadership structure, admissions goals, practices, and committee membership. In this qualitative study, admissions leaders characterized the ways in which entrenched beliefs, practices, and power structures in medical schools may perpetuate institutional racism, with far-reaching implications for health equity. Participants offered insights on how to remove inequitable structures and implement process changes. Without such action, calls for racial justice will likely remain performative, and racism across health care institutions will continue.

Institutional Variability in Representation of Women and Racial and Ethnic Minority Groups Among Medical School Faculty

Bolstering the ranks of women and underrepresented groups in medicine (URM) among medical faculty can help address ongoing health care disparities and therefore constitutes a critical public health need. There are increasing proportions of URM faculty, but comparisons of these changes with shifts in regional populations are lacking. To quantify the representation of women and URM and assess changes and variability in representation by individual US medical schools. This retrospective cross-sectional study assessed US medical school faculty rosters for women and URM, including American Indian and Alaska Native, Black, Hispanic, and Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander faculty. US allopathic medical schools participating in the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) Faculty Administrative Management Online User System from 1990 to 2019 (updated December 31 for each year), were included. Faculty data were analyzed from yearly cross-sections updated as of December 31 for each year from 1990 to 2019. For census data, decennial census data were used for years 1990, 2000, and 2010. Intercensal estimates were used for all other years from 1990 to 2019. Trends and variability in representation quotient (RQ), defined as representation of a group within an institution's faculty compared to its respective US county. There were 121 AAMC member institutions (72 076 faculty) in 1990, which increased to 144 institutions (184 577 faculty) in 2019. The median RQ of women faculty increased from 0.42 (IQR, 0.37-0.46) to 0.80 (IQR, 0.74-0.89) (slope, +1.4% per year; P < .001). The median RQ of Black faculty increased from 0.10 (IQR, 0.06-0.22) to 0.22 (IQR, 0.14-0.41) (slope, +0.5% per year; P < .001), but remained low. In contrast, the median RQ of Hispanic faculty decreased from 0.44 (IQR, 0.19-1.22) to 0.34 (IQR, 0.23-0.62) (slope, -1.7% per year; P < .001) between 1990 and 2019. Absolute total change in RQ of URM showed an increase; however, the 30-year slope did not differ from zero (+0.1% per year; P = .052). Although RQ of women faculty increased for most institutions (127 [88.2%]), large variability in URM faculty trends were observed (57 institutions [39.6%] with increased RQ and 10 institutions [6.9%] with decreased RQ). Nearly one-quarter of institutions shifted from the top to bottom 50th percentile institutional ranking by URM RQ with county vs national comparisons. The findings of this cross-sectional study suggest that representation of women in academic medicine improved with time, while URM overall experienced only modest increases with wide variability across institutions. Among URM, the Hispanic population has lost representational ground. County-based population comparisons provide new insights into institutional variation in representation among medical school faculty.

Understanding motivations behind medical student involvement in COVID-19 pandemic relief efforts

BackgroundAlthough students were removed from patient-facing settings at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic due to concerns of burdening teaching physicians and depleting personal protective equipment, some leaders suggest students can be effectively utilized when personnel resources may be scarce. There have been narrative discussions surrounding medical student involvement, but no studies exploring the attitudes of these students. The authors aim to quantify the degree to which factors influenced a medical student’s decision to or to not volunteer during the pandemic and to characterize medical students’ attitudes towards medical professionals’ duty to serve in a pandemic.MethodsThe authors developed and tested a secure web-based survey before distribution to students at 23 different US allopathic medical schools that did not graduate medical students early to aid in pandemic efforts between April and June 2020. Of the 599 students who completed the survey, 65.5% self-identified as female and were on average 25.94 years old (SD = 2.5). Multiple comparisons were made based on volunteer status. Ordinal scale questions were compared with the Mann Whitney U test, and the Chi-Squared test was used for categorical variables using R version 3.62.Results67.6% of students volunteered in pandemic relief activities and a majority of those students volunteered in non-patient-facing roles. Community service, new skills, and time commitment were top 3 influencing factors for students who volunteered, while risk to other, time commitment, and risk to self were top 3 influencing factors for students who chose not to volunteer. Compared to other specialties, students interested in primary care specialties agreed to a greater degree that physicians have a duty to serve in pandemic relief efforts.ConclusionsMedical students who volunteered cited self-serving factors and altruistic values as significant motivators. Students who did not volunteer were significantly more concerned with risks of COVID-19 exposure. However, medical students in general agreed that students should be allowed to volunteer in COVID-19 related relief efforts. As large areas of the United States continue to experience increases in COVID-19 cases, institutions should involve medical students in balancing the level of acceptable risk with the educational benefits.

Assessing the Impact of Diverse Approaches of Promoting Virtual Radiation Oncology Educational Content to Medical Students

Assessing the Impact of Diverse Approaches of Promoting Virtual Radiation Oncology Educational Content to Medical Students

Association of the COVID-19 Pandemic With Medical School Diversity Pathway Programs

Medical school pathway programs are a strategy to increase the diversity of the physician workforce. The COVID-19 pandemic may have negatively affected pathway programs, further challenging efforts to increase diversity. To describe the changes in medical school pathway programs during the COVID-19 pandemic and identify methods for sustaining and supporting these programs during and after the pandemic. A survey study using an exploratory sequential mixed-method design was conducted from January 4 to August 3, 2021. Semistructured interviews with a sample of medical school pathway program administrators and academic leaders of US allopathic and osteopathic medical school diversity pathway programs identified themes and patterns of change to pathway programs since the onset of the pandemic compared with previous years. These themes were used to develop a survey that was sent to medical schools to assess the association between COVID-19 and their programs. The association between the COVID-19 pandemic and medical school diversity pathway programs was explored using interview and survey data assessing respondent characteristics; changes in the scope, size, and funding of programs in 2020 compared with previous years; and respondents' perceptions of future needs for pathway programs. Twelve program administrators and academic leaders were interviewed. Interviews revealed challenges and benefits of virtual programming in engaging and reaching students and speakers, the value of community partnerships to sustaining programming, and the importance of psychosocial support to mediating students' mental health challenges due to COVID-19 and remote learning. Of 198 schools surveyed in the quantitative phase, 112 responded (56.6%), 106 (94.6%) of which had been sponsoring or assisting with pathway programs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Forty-two respondents (39.6%) had reduced pathway programs since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic compared with the previous year. Program cancellations were more likely to be noted in elementary school-aged (50.0% decrease in programming; P = .01) and middle school-aged (32.6%; P = .02) students compared with older groups. In this survey study, schools indicated that pathway programs were disrupted by COVID-19. Ongoing and flexible supports may be needed to sustain these programs. These findings are timely given recent investments in equity-focused programs to diversify the health workforce.

Step 1 is Pass/Fail, Now What? Can Clinical Clerkship Grades be Used as a Reliable Metric to Screen General Surgery Residency Applicants?

IntroductionFor decades, the three-digit United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 score has been used to competitively evaluate and compare candidates during the residency application process. Starting in 2022, however, all Step 1 scores will be converted to pass/fail. A different quantitative measure will likely gain importance in its stead, one such being clerkship performance grades. This study aims to determine the consistency of class rank and distribution of clerkship grades reported by medical schools for applicants to a general surgery program. MethodsCandidates’ Medical Student Performance Evaluation letters from 141 unique US allopathic medical schools were reviewed for student overall class rank, the number of grading tiers in each clerkship, and the percent achieving honors criteria in each clerkship from the 2020 application cycle. Comparative analysis was performed by region and medical school prestige. ResultsMost medical schools rank students using a four-tier system (e.g., fail, pass, high pass, and honors). A third of schools do not provide an overall class rank of students (34.7% of schools); this was most prevalent in the Northeast and Western regions. Schools in the Central US more often rank their students in five tiers compared to the South (P < 0.01). The percent of students that achieve the highest grading tier varies across the core clerkships (mean 37.1%, range 6.5%-78%); an average of 34.5% of students meet the highest honors tier in their Surgery clerkship. Students at US News and World Report Top 20 medical schools are more likely to receive the highest honors tier, across all core clerkships and overall class rank, than students at schools outside the Top 20 (P < 0.05). ConclusionsIn the absence of the United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 score, the variability in clerkship grading tiers and overall class rank will likely pose a challenge to residency programs’ ability to stratify desirable applicants. Further transparency and standardization may be required to compare students objectively and fairly from medical schools across the country.

Cost of the Otolaryngology Residency Application Process: Comparison With Other Specialties and Equity Implications.

ObjectiveThis study aims to assess trends in applicant-reported costs of the otolaryngology residency application process between 2019 and 2021 and evaluate the impact of application costs on number of interview offers.Study DesignCross-sectional study.SettingUS allopathic and osteopathic medical schools.MethodsSurvey data from applicants were obtained from the Texas STAR database (Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency) for the years 2019 to 2021. Outcomes included total cost, interview cost, other costs, application fees, and number of interview offers. Simple and multivariable linear regression was used to identify novel predictors of cost and assess the correlation between cost and interview offers.ResultsAmong 363 otolaryngology applicants, there was a 74% reduction in total costs and a 97% reduction in interview costs in the 2021 cycle vs the 2020 cycle. Significant predictors of total cost among otolaryngology applicants included the number of away rotations (P < .01), the number of research experiences (P = .04), and couples matching (P < .01). During the 2019 and 2020 application cycles, there was a significant association between applicant-reported total spending and number of otolaryngology interview offers (P < .01), which was not present during the 2021 cycle (P = .35).ConclusionNumber of otolaryngology interview offers appears to be directly correlated with applicant-reported total costs regardless of number of applications or interviews attended, which may be a source of inequality in the application process. There was a drastic reduction in total costs, interview costs, and other costs during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was likely driven by virtual interviewing and the absence of away rotations.

Impact of Medical Student Disciplinary Actions on the United States National Resident Match.

Introduction: Each year, the United States National Resident Matching Program describes the relative importance of a number of factors in the residency match for each speciality. However, the impact of disciplinary actions taken by a school when a student fails to meet certain expectations is not specifically evaluated but may have a major impact on a physician’s future performance.Methods: This study used electronic surveys sent to deans of medical education and residency program directors (PDs) to assess the way disciplinary actions are used at US allopathic medical schools, and the perceived implications of those actions on the residency match.Results: Thirty-three deans and 158 PDs participated (response rates of 26% and 22%, respectively). The median percentage of students put on probation each year as a function of class size was 3.3% (interquartile range [IQR] 2% to 6%). Three institutions reported putting greater than 10% of their students on probation each year and one institution reported putting 22% of their students on probation each year. A student's risk of failing to match was thought to be very or extremely likely (to deans and PDs, respectively) if there was a history of failed coursework (18.8% and 41.2%, p = 0.017), academic probation (34.4% and 67.1%, p = 0.009), or professionalism probation (78.1% and 83.9%, p = 0.016). The differences between each of the above types of disciplinary action’s impact on the likelihood of interviewing (p < 0.001) and risk of failure to match (p < 0.001) were also significant among both groups.Conclusion: Significant variability exists in the use and reporting of disciplinary actions at US medical schools. A history of these adverse actions, even if successfully remediated, was thought to negatively impact a student’s likelihood to interview and match. Greater standardization in the use and reporting of disciplinary actions would be appropriate to ensure equitable treatment of students nationwide.

Technology Literacy in Undergraduate Medical Education: Review and Survey of the US Medical School Innovation and Technology Programs

BackgroundModern innovations, like machine learning, genomics, and digital health, are being integrated into medical practice at a rapid pace. Physicians in training receive little exposure to the implications, drawbacks, and methodologies of upcoming technologies prior to their deployment. As a result, there is an increasing need for the incorporation of innovation and technology (I&T) training, starting in medical school.ObjectiveWe aimed to identify and describe curricular and extracurricular opportunities for innovation in medical technology in US undergraduate medical education to highlight challenges and develop insights for future directions of program development.MethodsA review of publicly available I&T program information on the official websites of US allopathic medical schools was conducted in June 2020. Programs were categorized by structure and implementation. The geographic distribution of these categories across US regions was analyzed. A survey was administered to school-affiliated student organizations with a focus on I&T and publicly available contact information. The data collected included the founding year, thematic focus, target audience, activities offered, and participant turnout rate.ResultsA total of 103 I&T opportunities at 69 distinct Liaison Committee on Medical Education–accredited medical schools were identified and characterized into the following six categories: (1) integrative 4-year curricula, (2) facilitated doctor of medicine/master of science dual degree programs in a related field, (3) interdisciplinary collaborations, (4) areas of concentration, (5) preclinical electives, and (6) student-run clubs. The presence of interdisciplinary collaboration is significantly associated with the presence of student-led initiatives (P=.001). “Starting and running a business in healthcare” and “medical devices” were the most popular thematic focuses of student-led I&T groups, representing 87% (13/15) and 80% (12/15) of respondents, respectively. “Career pathways exploration for students” was the only type of activity that was significantly associated with a high event turnout rate of >26 students per event (P=.03).ConclusionsExisting school-led and student-driven opportunities in medical I&T indicate growing national interest and reflect challenges in implementation. The greater visibility of opportunities, collaboration among schools, and development of a centralized network can be considered to better prepare students for the changing landscape of medical practice.