Characteristics Associated with Successful Residency Match in General Surgery

Reagan A. Collins, Kaitlyn Nimmer, Salma A. Sheriff, Tania K. Arora, Anai N. Kothari, Carrie E Cunningham, C. Clarke
{"title":"Characteristics Associated with Successful Residency Match in General Surgery","authors":"Reagan A. Collins, Kaitlyn Nimmer, Salma A. Sheriff, Tania K. Arora, Anai N. Kothari, Carrie E Cunningham, C. Clarke","doi":"10.1097/as9.0000000000000469","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n To evaluate characteristics of matched and unmatched general surgery residency (GSR) applicants.\n \n \n \n Given the recent change of the United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 grading to pass/fail, understanding the factors that influence GSR match success is integral to identifying potential interventions to improve match rates for diverse medical students.\n \n \n \n Retrospective review of GSR National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) applicant and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) active resident data between 2011 and 2022. Data included application characteristics for United States (“US”) and “independent” applicants, factors cited by program directors in the interview and ranking process, paths pursued if applicants went unmatched, and racial/ethnic representation.\n \n \n \n A total of 9149 US and 3985 independent applicants applied to GSR between 2011 and 2021. Matched versus unmatched applicants had higher step 1 scores (US: 236 vs 218, P = 0.005; independent: 237 vs 228, P = 0.001), higher step 2 scores (US: 248 vs 232, P = 0.006; independent: 245 vs 234, P < 0.001), more likely to belong to alpha omega alpha (US: 17.1% vs 1.6%, P = 0.002) or to attend a top 40 National Institutes of Health-funded school (US: 31.0% vs 19.4%, P = 0.002) compared to unmatched applicants. Program directors heavily factored step 1 and step 2 scores, letters of recommendation, interactions with faculty and trainees, and interpersonal skills when interviewing and ranking applicants. The proportion of active general surgery residents versus applicants was lower for Asians (12.3% vs 20.9%, P < 0.001), Black/African American (5.0% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), Hispanic/Latino (5.0% vs 9.4%, P = 0.001), and underrepresented in medicine students (10.3% vs 19.1%, P < 0.001).\n \n \n \n In the pass/fail step 1 era, factors including step 2 score and other subjective metrics may be more heavily weighted in the GSR match process.\n","PeriodicalId":503165,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Surgery Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Surgery Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/as9.0000000000000469","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To evaluate characteristics of matched and unmatched general surgery residency (GSR) applicants. Given the recent change of the United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 grading to pass/fail, understanding the factors that influence GSR match success is integral to identifying potential interventions to improve match rates for diverse medical students. Retrospective review of GSR National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) applicant and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) active resident data between 2011 and 2022. Data included application characteristics for United States (“US”) and “independent” applicants, factors cited by program directors in the interview and ranking process, paths pursued if applicants went unmatched, and racial/ethnic representation. A total of 9149 US and 3985 independent applicants applied to GSR between 2011 and 2021. Matched versus unmatched applicants had higher step 1 scores (US: 236 vs 218, P = 0.005; independent: 237 vs 228, P = 0.001), higher step 2 scores (US: 248 vs 232, P = 0.006; independent: 245 vs 234, P < 0.001), more likely to belong to alpha omega alpha (US: 17.1% vs 1.6%, P = 0.002) or to attend a top 40 National Institutes of Health-funded school (US: 31.0% vs 19.4%, P = 0.002) compared to unmatched applicants. Program directors heavily factored step 1 and step 2 scores, letters of recommendation, interactions with faculty and trainees, and interpersonal skills when interviewing and ranking applicants. The proportion of active general surgery residents versus applicants was lower for Asians (12.3% vs 20.9%, P < 0.001), Black/African American (5.0% vs 8.8%, P < 0.001), Hispanic/Latino (5.0% vs 9.4%, P = 0.001), and underrepresented in medicine students (10.3% vs 19.1%, P < 0.001). In the pass/fail step 1 era, factors including step 2 score and other subjective metrics may be more heavily weighted in the GSR match process.
与普外科住院医师成功配对相关的特征
评估匹配和未匹配的普通外科住院医师培训(GSR)申请人的特征。 鉴于最近美国医学执照考试第一步评分改为通过/未通过,了解影响GSR匹配成功的因素对于确定潜在的干预措施以提高不同医学生的匹配率至关重要。 回顾性审查了2011年至2022年期间GSR国家住院医师匹配计划(NRMP)申请人和医学研究生教育认证委员会(ACGME)在职住院医师的数据。数据包括美国("US")和 "独立 "申请者的申请特征、项目主任在面试和排名过程中引用的因素、申请者未被匹配时的途径以及种族/族裔代表性。 2011 年至 2021 年间,共有 9149 名美国申请人和 3985 名独立申请人申请了金沙国际网上娱乐。匹配申请人与未匹配申请人的第一步分数更高(美国:236 vs 218,P = 0.005;独立申请人:237 vs 228,P = 0.001),第二步分数更高(美国:248 vs 232,P = 0.006;独立申请人:245 vs 234,P < 0.001),更有可能属于α Ω α(美国:17.1% vs 1.6%,P = 0.002),或者与非匹配申请人相比,更有可能就读于国家卫生研究院资助的前 40 所学校(美国:31.0% vs 19.4%,P = 0.002)。项目主任在对申请者进行面试和排名时,将步骤 1 和步骤 2 分数、推荐信、与教师和学员的互动以及人际交往能力作为重要因素。亚洲人(12.3% vs 20.9%,P<0.001)、黑人/非洲裔美国人(5.0% vs 8.8%,P<0.001)、西班牙裔/拉丁美洲人(5.0% vs 9.4%,P=0.001)和医学专业学生比例偏低(10.3% vs 19.1%,P<0.001)的在职普外科住院医师与申请人的比例较低。 在通过/未通过第 1 步的时代,包括第 2 步分数和其他主观指标在内的因素在 GSR 匹配过程中的权重可能更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信