Trends in NRMP Data from 2007-2014 for U.S. Seniors Matching into Emergency Medicine

Student Doctor Network: Fake News or Facts for Emergency Medicine Applicants?

INTRODUCTION

Residency applicants use multiple resources to guide their application process including the Student Doctor Network (SDN), a publicly available online forum for the discussion of various topics in medical education. In recent years, specialty-specific forums for residency applicants to self-report their own application information have become popular. These forums allow other applicants to review self-reported data from their peers to inform their own application process. The accuracy of this resource is unknown. To determine whether the SDN is an accurate source of information for emergency medicine (EM) applicants, we compared self-reported SDN data to objective data from the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed self-reported SDN data by DO and MD candidates from EM forums for the 2014, 2016, and 2018 residency application cycles. These data were compared to the NRMP charting outcomes for each respective year.

RESULTS

A total of 360 EM applicants self-reported data on the SDN during the years reviewed. The majority of these applicants (79%) posted for the 2018 application cycle following transition to a Google Docs spreadsheet. For the first two years of analysis, mean United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) scores were similar to SDN reports. For the most recent year studied, applicants who posted to SDN reported higher mean (USMLE) Step 1 (234, 95% confidence interval [CI], 233-236) and Step 2 scores (250, 95% CI, 248-251) when compared to NRMP data (231 and 241). Reported contiguous residency program ranks were similar to NRMP in all years, and the proportion indicating Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Medical Society membership was similar to NRMP only for the most recent year studied.

CONCLUSION

Self-reporting on SDN showed a slight bias toward higher USMLE step scores in the most recent year when compared to objective NRMP data. Self-reporting on SDN has increased in recent years, but it is unknown whether this increase will lead to more accurate information for EM applicants. Given the self-reported nature of the SDN, applicants should use SDN forums with caution.

An Analysis of Trends in National Residency Matching Program Match Data for Orthopedic Surgery

Due to electronic residency applications, US Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 scores are frequently used by orthopedic surgery program directors to screen applicants. Prospective applicants therefore often use Step 1 scores as a proxy for specialty competitiveness. The goal of this investigation was two-fold: (1) to determine whether trends in Step 1 scores are indicative of trends in competitiveness of orthopedic surgery and (2) to report the characteristics that optimize a US medical student's match success. A retrospective review of published National Resident Matching Program data from 2009 to 2018 was performed for orthopedic surgery residency applicants. Additional data from the Charting Outcomes reports were used for specific analyses of applicant characteristics. From 2009 to 2018, the number of orthopedic surgery residency positions grew at an annual rate of 1.51% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.37% to 1.64%; P<.001), accommodating the 1.26% (95% CI, 0.63% to 1.90%; P=.006) annual increase in the number of applicants who ranked orthopedic surgery as their preferred specialty choice (only choice or first choice). There were no significant changes in the applicant-to-position ratio (95% CI, -0.85% to 0.37%; P=.483) or the match rate for US seniors who ranked orthopedic surgery as their preferred choice (95% CI, -0.23% to 0.87%; P=.313). Increases in mean Step 1 scores of matched orthopedic surgery applicants parallel national Step 1 growth trends (0.49% vs 0.44%, respectively). Although orthopedic surgery is currently a competitive specialty to match into, this has been the case since 2009. Increasing Step 1 scores of matched applicants is not unique to orthopedic surgery and should not be misinterpreted as a proxy for increasing competitiveness of the specialty. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(6):e616-e622.].

How well did our students match? A peer-validated quantitative assessment of medical school match success: the match quality score

Background: Assessment of an individual medical school's performance in the match is an important outcome of the educational program. Unfortunately, student rank lists are not public. A method to objectively gauge the quality of an institution's match regardless of student preference has not been described in the literature.Objective: This manuscript serves to determine the relative weights of included variables and derive a statistically valid Match Quality Score (MQS).Design: Between 2016 and 2018, student affairs experts derived from a national cohort validated the MQS by scoring factitious mini-match lists that covered three variables: student's Match Status, specialty Competitiveness, and residency program Reputation.Results: Of the variables assessed, only Match Status and Competitiveness were found to be significant. We derived the resulting coefficients for the Match Quality Score (MQS) as: [3.74A (# students successfully matched) + 2.34B (# students matching into their initial specialty in the SOAP process) + 1.77C (# students who secured a SOAP position in another specialty) + 0.26D (# students matching into a specialty where there are more applicants than spots)]/Total # students.Conclusions: The MQS is a potentially useful educational outcome measurement for US medical schools and may be considered as an outcome measure for continuous quality improvement to tailor future institutional changes to training, mentoring, and student-advising programs.