Predictors of getting a residency interview: Differences by medical specialty

Understanding the Match: The Effect of Signaling, Demographics, and Applicant Characteristics on Match Success in the Orthopaedic Residency Application Process

INTRODUCTION

As of the 2022 to 2023 match cycle, orthopaedic residency programs began offering applicants 30 signals as part of a preference signaling program. Many have assumed that signals would become powerful tools in the match process, yet no objective data currently exist analyzing their effect. This study aims to provide such analysis while also offering comparisons with other factors affecting match success.

METHODS

Self-reported survey data on applicants and applications from 2017 to 2023 from the Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency database were queried. Variables associated with receiving interviews and match success were analyzed using two-sided Student t -tests, chi-squared tests, variance ratio testing, and receiver operating characteristic analysis.

RESULTS

Compared with 2017 to 2022, 2023 applicants submitted fewer applications (61.8 versus 78; P < 0.001), received fewer interview offers (11.6 versus 13.8; P < 0.001), and interview offers were spread more evenly among applicants (SD, 6.82 versus 9.10; P < 0.001). For 2023 applications, odds of securing an interview were increased most by away rotations (odds ratios [OR] 61.8; P < 0.001), use of a signal (OR, 9.61; P < 0.001), and geographic connection (OR, 4.70; P < 0.001). Female applicants received more interview offers from signaled programs than their male counterparts (11.2 versus 8.94; P = 0.003). Applicant variables most predictive of match success in 2023 were interview offers (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] = 0.802), step 2 CK score (AUC = 0.673), and step 1 score (AUC = 0.648).

DISCUSSION

The preference signaling program seems to be accomplishing its goals of reducing applications and more evenly distributing interviews. Away rotations, signals, and geographic connections represent the strongest predictors of applications resulting in a successful match. Applicants must use their signals carefully to maximize their chance of success.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Contemporary Trends in the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Match and the Effects of COVID-19

Objective

We aimed to elucidate associations between geographic location, size, and ranking of medical schools that orthopaedic surgery residents graduate from and the residencies that they match both pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 pandemic by examining the 2017 to 2022 orthopaedic surgery residency cohorts.

Methods

Demographics were extracted using Doximity Residency Navigator platform, the 2021 US News and World Report, and program websites. Medical schools were classified as large if they had >613 medical students. Postgraduate year 1 (PGY-1) (2021 match) and PGY-2 (2022 match) residents were classified as the COVID-19 cohort. Location was categorized as Northeast, Midwest, South, and West. Chi-square tests, Cohen's H value, and descriptive statistics were used for analysis with statistical significance set at p <0.05.

Results

Four thousand two hundred forty-three residents from 160 accredited US orthopaedic residency programs (78.4%) were included. Northeastern applicants were most likely to match in the same region (p <0.01), and southern applicants were most likely to match at their home program (p <0.001). Applicants affected by the COVID-19 pandemic did not differ from their predecessors with regards to matching to the same region (p = 0.637) or home program (p = 0.489). Applicants from public medical schools were more likely to match in the same region and at their home program (p <0.001), whereas those from private medical schools were more likely to match at top-ranked residencies (p <0.001). Students from both top 25- and top 50-ranked medical schools were more likely to match at their home program (p <0.01) and attend top 20-ranked residency programs (p <0.0001).

Conclusion

These results demonstrate significant associations between matched residencies and attended medical schools' geographic location, school type, and ranking. During the pandemic, geographic trends were overall unchanged, whereas residents from large or lower-ranked schools were more likely to match at home programs, and those from private or top-ranked schools were less likely to attend top residencies.

Outcomes of the Internal Medicine Supplemental Application: Preliminary Data on the 2022-2023 Match

INTRODUCTION

Preference signaling (program signals and geographic preference divisions) was introduced as a component of the supplemental application for internal medicine applicants applying to programs within the United States (USA) during the 2021-22 cycle. These signals were intended to address application inflation by allowing applicants to express interest in and increase their likelihood of receiving interviews from their top programs. There is little published data, however, to describe the impact of preference signaling on the likelihood of receiving interviews from a program. This study thus sought to analyze, in a small subset of US applicants, whether preference signals were associated with a higher likelihood of obtaining a residency interview.

METHODS

A survey was distributed in March 2023 to US MD seniors from the four allopathic medical schools in North Carolina who applied to categorical internal medicine residency programs during the 2022-23 application cycle. The survey was developed by the research team to provide respondents with the opportunity to report data from the electronic residency application service (ERAS) application and provide data on interviews received, actions taken throughout the application season, and outcomes of the National Residency Match Program (NRMP) using a combination of free response and multiple choice questions.

RESULTS

Forty-seven out of a total of 85 contacted (55%) applicants completed some or all of the survey. Of those who completed the entirety of the survey, 39 (82.98%) completed the supplemental portion of the application and the available preference signaling. Applicants in this study were 2.95 (Odds ratio, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.20 - 3.97, p<0.01) times as likely to receive an interview invitation from a program if they used a program signal. Applicants were 1.75 (odds ratio, 95% CI 1.38 - 2.21, p<0.01) times as likely to receive an interview invitation from a program in an indicated geographic preference division. Forty-seven percent (95% CI 31 - 64%) matched to a program they had sent a program signal to, and 97% (95% CI 78 - 100%) matched to a program in an indicated geographic preference division.

CONCLUSIONS

The program signals and geographic preference division components of the supplemental application increased the likelihood of receiving an interview invitation but did not have a clear impact on match outcomes. Further research with larger sample sizes will be necessary to determine how these signals actually modify the outcomes of the NRMP.

Matching into competitive surgical residencies: predictors of success

Evidence-informed data may help students matching into competitive residency programs guide curricular activities, extracurricular activities, and residency career choices. We aimed to examine the characteristics of students applying to competitive surgical residencies and identify predictors of matching success. We identified the five lowest match rates for the surgical subspecialities listed in the 2020 National Resident Matching Program report to define a surgical residency as competitive. We analyzed a database from 115 United States medical schools regarding application data from 2017 to 2020. Multilevel logistic regression was used to determine predictors of matching. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.A total of 1,448 medical students submitted 25,549 applications. The five most competitive specialties included were plastic surgery (N = 172), otolaryngology (N = 342), neurological surgery (N = 163), vascular surgery (N = 52), orthopedic surgery (N = 679), and thoracic surgery (N = 40). We found that medical students with a geographical connection (adjusted OR, 1.65 [95% CI, 1.41 to 1.93]), and students who did an away rotation at the applied program (adjusted OR, 3.22 [95% CI, 2.75 to 3.78]) had statistically significantly increased odds of matching into a competitive surgical specialty. Furthermore, we found that students with a United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 score below 230 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) score below 240 had increased odds of matching if they completed an away rotation at the applied program. Completing an away rotation and geographical connection to the institution may contribute more than academic criteria for selection into a competitive surgical residency after an interview. This finding may be due to less variation in academic criteria among this pool of high-performing medical students. Students with limited resources who apply to a competitive surgical specialty may be at a disadvantage given the financial burden of an away rotation.

Profiling medical specialties and informing aspiring physicians: a data-driven approach

A detailed, unbiased perspective of the inter-relations among medical fields could help students make informed decisions on their future career plans. Using a data-driven approach, the inter-relations among different medical fields were decomposed and clustered based on the similarity of their working environments.Publicly available, aggregate databases were merged into a single rich dataset containing demographic, working environment and remuneration information for physicians across Canada. These data were collected from the Canadian Institute for Health Information, the Canadian Medical Association, and the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, primarily from 2018 to 2019. The merged dataset includes 25 unique medical specialties, each with 36 indicator variables. Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) was used to group specialties into distinct clusters based on relatedness.The 25 medical specialties were decomposed into seven clusters (latent variables) that were chosen based on the Bayesian Information Criterion. The Kruskal-Wallis test identified eight indicator variables that significantly differed between the seven profiles. These variables included income, work settings and payment styles. Variables that did not significantly vary between profiles included demographics, professional satisfaction, and work-life balance satisfaction.The 25 analyzed medical specialties were grouped in an unsupervised manner into seven profiles via LPA. These profiles correspond to expected and meaningful groups of specialties that share a common theme and set of indicator variables (e.g. procedurally-focused, clinic-based practice). These profiles can help aspiring physicians narrow down and guide specialty choice.

Relationship Between Residency Match Distance From Medical School and Virtual Application, School Characteristics, and Specialty Competitiveness

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the residency match process by eliminating away rotations and changing from in-person to virtual interviews. In this study, we explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the geographic match distance of United States (US) senior medical students across all specialties.

METHODS

We collected publicly available student match data between 2018 and 2021 from US allopathic medical schools and calculated match distance between medical school and residency training using a novel metric - the "match space." Match space was codified by whether the student matched at their home institution, home state, adjacent state, same or adjacent US census division (non-adjacent state) or skipped at least one US census division. Adjusting for covariates, ordinal logistic regression correlated school and specialty characteristics with match distance pre- and post-pandemic for all specialties. We defined and ranked specialty competitiveness using predictive values from factor analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 34,672 students representing 66 medical schools from 28 states matched into 26 specialties in 50 states and Canada. Fifty-nine percent of students were from public institutions, and 27% of schools ranked in the top 40 for research. The mean percentage of in-state students by school was 60.3% (range 3-100%). Match space was lower after the pandemic (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.90-0.98; p=0.006), from schools with higher in-state percentages (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.72-0.76), from top National Institutes of Health-funded institutions (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.85-0.92), from the Northeast (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.67-0.75; Midwest reference), and the West (OR 0.67, 95% 0.60-0.74). Match space was higher for students graduating from private schools (OR 1.11, 95% CI 1.05-1.19), from the South (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.2-1.33), and matching into more competitive specialties (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02-1.14). The top five most competitive specialties were Plastic Surgery, Neurosurgery, Dermatology, Orthopedic Surgery, and Otolaryngology. Internal Medicine ranked eighth.

CONCLUSIONS

After the COVID-19 pandemic, students graduating from US allopathic schools matched closer to their home institution. Students attending public schools, schools with more in-state matriculants, and schools with higher research rankings also matched closer to their home institutions. Specialty competitiveness and US census region also impacted match distance. Our study adds insight into how geographic match patterns were influenced by school, specialty choice, and the pandemic.

The US Residency Selection Process After the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 Pass/Fail Change: Overview for Applicants and Educators

The United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1, arguably the most significant assessment in the USMLE examination series, changed from a 3-digit score to a pass/fail outcome in January 2022. Given the rapidly evolving body of literature on this subject, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of the historical context and impact of this change on various stakeholders involved in residency selection. For this, relevant keyword-based searches were performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus to identify relevant literature. Given the unique history of USMLE Step 1 in the US residency selection process and the score's correlation with future performance in board-certifying examinations in different specialties, this scoring change is predicted to significantly impact US Doctor of Medicine students, US Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine students, international medical graduates, and residency program directors, among others. The significance and the rationale of the pass/fail change along with the implications for both residency applicants and educators are also summarized in this paper. Although medical programs, academic institutions, and residency organizing bodies across the United States have swiftly stepped up to ensure a seamless transition and have attempted to ensure equity for all, the conversion process carries considerable uncertainty for residency applicants. For educators, the increasing number of applications conflicts with holistic application screening, leading to the expected greater use of objective measures, with USMLE Step 2 Clinical Knowledge likely becoming the preferred screening tool in lieu of Step 1.

Orthopaedic Surgery Away Rotations

Away rotations have become a critical factor for a successful orthopaedic surgery residency match. Away rotations significantly improve an applicant's chance of matching into an orthopaedic residency. Away rotations were limited during the 2020 to 2021 academic year because of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the 2021 to 2022 academic year, the American Association of Medical Colleges coalition recommended students only complete 1 rotation outside their home institution, whereas the American Orthopaedic Association Council of Residency Directors argued that multiple rotations should be allowed. We sought to quantify the impact of these restrictions on orthopaedic surgery applicants during the 2020 to 2021 residency application cycle.

COVID 19: A Cause for Pause in Undergraduate Medical Education and Catalyst for Innovation

As the world held its breath for news surrounding COVID-19 and hunkered down amidst stay-at-home orders, medical students across the U.S. wondered if they would be called to serve on the front lines of the pandemic. Medical school administrators faced the challenge of protecting learners while also minimizing harm to their medical education. This balancing act raised critical questions in medical education as institutions reacted to changing guidelines. COVID-19 has punctuated already contentious areas of medical education and has forced institutions and organizations to take quick action. From the perspectives of a recent medical school graduate and current resident (ES) and a practicing clinician-educator (SHG), we examine the pandemic's impact on undergraduate medical education through an ethical lens. First, we explore the value of medical education, what drives this value, and how COVID-19 may alter it. We next consider student choice and how shifts toward utilitarianism in healthcare during a pandemic may affect learning and career exploration. Then, we inquire how access to technology may impact the experience of medical students from diverse backgrounds and varied institutions during a rapid shift to socially distanced learning. We identify vulnerabilities for students at several phases of the journey: premedical, preclinical, clinical, and preparation for residency. Finally, we address the hidden curriculum of COVID-19, its potential erosion of empathy among current medical students, and possible long-term consequences for future physicians and patients.

Curriculum Vitae Workshops: Promoting Transparency in Alpha Omega Alpha While Serving Student Needs

OBJECTIVE

To promote equity in the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society (AOA) selection process, clear and timely communication of eligibility criteria is needed. Herein, the authors describe and assess the effectiveness of a novel method for improving transparency in the AOA selection process while also teaching students key professional development skills.

METHODS

The authors hosted curriculum vitae (CV) workshops for interested medical students. One part of each session was dedicated to sharing information about AOA and its selection process, while the rest focused on teaching students how to build effective CVs. After the most recent session, students were asked to complete a survey about the effectiveness of the workshop.

RESULTS

Between 2019 and 2020, three CV workshops were hosted. Interest in the events was high, with approximately 15 to 30 first- and second-year medical students participating in each. Based on survey results, participants found the workshop helped them gain a better understanding of AOA eligibility and selection (100%, n = 10) and taught them key CV development skills (100%, n = 10).

CONCLUSION

These workshops are a novel approach to disseminating AOA eligibility criteria and can be employed by medical schools to promote transparency in the AOA selection process. They also give students the skills to craft CVs that will better prepare them for applying to residency and other academic opportunities. As such medical schools and AOA chapters should consider implementing a similar model at their institutions.