Abstract

Objective

We explored the impact that attributes of US medical school seniors have on their success in matching to a surgical residency, in order to analyze trends for National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) match outcomes in surgical specialties between 2007 and 2009.

Methods

Using Electronic Residency Application Service data and NRMP outcomes, we analyzed medical students' attributes and their effect in successfully matching students into residency positions in surgery, otolaryngology, orthopedic surgery, plastic surgery, and obstetrics and gynecology. Attributes analyzed included self-reported United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 and Step 2 scores, Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) Honor Medical Society membership, research experience, additional graduate degree status, and graduation from a top 40 National Institutes of Health (NIH)–funded medical school. Odds ratios were calculated for each criterion, and 95% confidence intervals were used to determine significance.

Results

Between 2007 and 2009, the number of surgical specialty residency positions increased by 86, and the number of applicants increased by 34. Membership in AOA, USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 scores, research experience, and graduation from a top 40 NIH-funded medical school frequently had a significant impact on residents successfully matching into many specialties, while additional graduate degrees had no effect on matching into surgical specialties (range 0.64 to 1.2).

Conclusions

Although the statistical significance varied across specialties, higher USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 scores, AOA membership, research experience, and graduation from a top 40 NIH-funded medical school generally had a positive impact on match success to surgical residency for US allopathic seniors. Test preparation and seeking research experience during undergraduate medical education may be effective approaches for increasing the likelihood of success for US seniors matching into a surgical specialty.

Abstract

Background

During the evaluation process, Residency Admissions Committees typically gather data on objective and subjective measures of a medical student's performance through the Electronic Residency Application Service, including medical school grades, standardized test scores, research achievements, nonacademic accomplishments, letters of recommendation, the dean's letter, and personal statements. Using these data to identify which medical students are likely to become successful residents in an academic residency program in obstetrics and gynecology is difficult and to date, not well studied.

Objective

To determine whether objective information in medical students' applications can help predict resident success.

Method

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all residents who matched into the Johns Hopkins University residency program in obstetrics and gynecology between 1994 and 2004 and entered the program through the National Resident Matching Program as a postgraduate year-1 resident. Residents were independently evaluated by faculty and ranked in 4 groups according to perceived level of success. Applications from residents in the highest and lowest group were abstracted. Groups were compared using the Fisher exact test and the Student t test.

Results

Seventy-five residents met inclusion criteria and 29 residents were ranked in the highest and lowest quartiles (15 in highest, 14 in lowest). Univariate analysis identified no variables as consistent predictors of resident success.

Conclusion

In a program designed to train academic obstetrician-gynecologists, objective data from medical students' applications did not correlate with successful resident performance in our obstetrics-gynecology residency program. We need to continue our search for evaluation criteria that can accurately and reliably select the medical students that are best fit for our specialty.

Abstract

Background

When the data from the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) are used to analyze trends in medical students' career preferences, positions offered outside the match are omitted. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the extent and nature of out-of-match residency offers.

Methods

We obtained total resident complements and postgraduate year-1 positions offered in 7 specialties in 2007 and compared these with the 2007 NRMP match data. We compared the percentage of positions offered outside the match to “success” in matching United States medical doctors (USMDs) and to the availability of fellowship positions, using the Spearman rank order test (SROT).

Results

A total of 18 030 postgraduate year-1 positions were offered in 9 specialty areas. Of 15 205 positions offered in the match, 54% were taken by USMDs. The percentage of outside-the-match offers was found to vary by specialty, from 7% in obstetrics-gynecology to 23% in internal medicine, and was inversely correlated with the specialty's “success” in matching USMDs (SROT = −0.87). The 3 nonprocedural primary care specialties (internal medicine, family medicine, and pediatrics) accounted for 10 091 (46.2%) of the 21 845 total positions offered in the match, with 4401 (43.6%) offered almost entirely to non-USMDs. Another 2467 positions were offered outside the match, resulting in 6868 positions offered to non-USMDs (55% of all primary care positions). In internal medicine, the percentage of outside-the-match offers was significantly and inversely associated with the availability of intrainstitutional fellowship programs (P < .0001). Prematching of independent applicants was significantly higher in primary care than in procedural-lifestyle programs (P < .0001).

Conclusion

The NRMP's match data do not account for positions filled outside the match, a finding that appears to be significant. In 2007, 1 in 5 positions in primary care was offered outside the match.

The issue of residency positions being offered outside the match is one of deep and long-standing interest to the National Resident Matching Program, which was founded decades ago to relieve the pressure and stress created by an unstructured process. We congratulate the authors of “Outside-the-Match Residency Offers: The Possible Extent and Implications of “Prematching” in Postgraduate Medical Education” for bringing additional attention to this important topic; however, we do not concur with some of their assumptions and conclusions.

We believe the authors' analysis may be flawed for several reasons. First, they contend that preliminary surgery positions make up all the

In this issue of JGME Christmas and colleagues1 present perspectives from highly respected clinicians in academic medical centers' departments of medicine. Their qualitative research methods probe the beliefs of those clinicians related to the advantages and challenges of pursuing a career as an academic expert clinician. The article presents these faculty physicians' perspective on the quality, safety, affordability, or patient-centeredness of clinical care provided in teaching settings. Yet its most intriguing and powerful contribution is insight into the thoughts of the clinical role models of physicians in training. The clinicians studied and their counterparts at other teaching institutions