骨科住院两年后偏好信号的演变及其影响。

IF 3.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
JBJS Open Access Pub Date : 2025-07-24 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00036
Matthew J Folkman, Angela Mihalic, Christopher G Sanford
{"title":"骨科住院两年后偏好信号的演变及其影响。","authors":"Matthew J Folkman, Angela Mihalic, Christopher G Sanford","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Residency programs have begun to offer preference signaling as a method for applicants to demonstrate commitment to programs. Orthopaedic surgery, which began signaling in 2022, allows applicants to use up to 30 signals. Early studies have evaluated the effects of signaling, demonstrating decreased application volume, varying effects on interviews, and high levels of applicant and faculty satisfaction. While the effects of signaling are beginning to be studied, multiple year evaluations are absent from the literature. The purpose of this study was to explore the impacts of signaling on the orthopaedic surgery match over its first two years.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cohort study using a prospectively collected <i>Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency</i> database. The database contains survey data from 2017 to 2024 including applicants' demographics, academic performance, and application data. Applicants were first placed into cohorts comparing presignaling and postsignaling data. A second analysis organized applicants into the first year and second year of signaling. Cohorts were compared using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and independent samples <i>t</i>-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 1786 orthopaedic surgery applicants from 2017 to 2024. In the first two years of signaling, the mean applications decreased by 23 (p < 0.001), interview offers decreased by three (p < 0.001), publications increased by one (p < 0.001), and volunteer experiences decreased by one (p < 0.001). When compared with the first year, the second year of signaling decreased applications by 15 (p < 0.001), decreased interviews by one (p = 0.030), decreased volunteer experiences by four (p < 0.001), and decreased publications by one (p = 0.015). There was no significant difference in match rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Orthopaedic surgery preference signaling after two years significantly decreased mean applications, interview opportunities, and extracurricular experiences of applicants without affecting match success. These findings suggest that preference signaling continues to be an effective method at reducing application volume for programs and applicants while creating equitable opportunities for applicants after two years.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III-Retrospective Cohort Study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>","PeriodicalId":36492,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Open Access","volume":"10 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12282851/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Evolution and Impact of Preference Signaling on Orthopaedic Residency After Two Years.\",\"authors\":\"Matthew J Folkman, Angela Mihalic, Christopher G Sanford\",\"doi\":\"10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00036\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Residency programs have begun to offer preference signaling as a method for applicants to demonstrate commitment to programs. Orthopaedic surgery, which began signaling in 2022, allows applicants to use up to 30 signals. Early studies have evaluated the effects of signaling, demonstrating decreased application volume, varying effects on interviews, and high levels of applicant and faculty satisfaction. While the effects of signaling are beginning to be studied, multiple year evaluations are absent from the literature. The purpose of this study was to explore the impacts of signaling on the orthopaedic surgery match over its first two years.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cohort study using a prospectively collected <i>Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency</i> database. The database contains survey data from 2017 to 2024 including applicants' demographics, academic performance, and application data. Applicants were first placed into cohorts comparing presignaling and postsignaling data. A second analysis organized applicants into the first year and second year of signaling. Cohorts were compared using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and independent samples <i>t</i>-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 1786 orthopaedic surgery applicants from 2017 to 2024. In the first two years of signaling, the mean applications decreased by 23 (p < 0.001), interview offers decreased by three (p < 0.001), publications increased by one (p < 0.001), and volunteer experiences decreased by one (p < 0.001). When compared with the first year, the second year of signaling decreased applications by 15 (p < 0.001), decreased interviews by one (p = 0.030), decreased volunteer experiences by four (p < 0.001), and decreased publications by one (p = 0.015). There was no significant difference in match rate.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Orthopaedic surgery preference signaling after two years significantly decreased mean applications, interview opportunities, and extracurricular experiences of applicants without affecting match success. These findings suggest that preference signaling continues to be an effective method at reducing application volume for programs and applicants while creating equitable opportunities for applicants after two years.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level III-Retrospective Cohort Study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"JBJS Open Access\",\"volume\":\"10 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12282851/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"JBJS Open Access\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00036\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/7/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Open Access","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:住院医师项目已经开始提供偏好信号,作为申请者证明对项目承诺的一种方法。从2022年开始使用信号的整形外科允许申请者使用最多30个信号。早期的研究已经评估了信号的影响,证明了申请量的减少,对面试的不同影响,以及申请人和教师满意度的高水平。虽然信号传导的影响正在开始研究,但文献中缺乏多年评估。本研究的目的是探讨信号传导对骨科手术前两年手术配合的影响。方法:我们使用前瞻性收集的德克萨斯州寻求住院医师申请透明度数据库进行回顾性队列研究。该数据库包含2017年至2024年的调查数据,包括申请人的人口统计数据、学习成绩和申请数据。申请人首先被放入比较信号发送前和信号发送后数据的队列中。第二项分析将申请者分为信号学的第一年和第二年。采用描述性统计、卡方检验和独立样本t检验对队列进行比较。结果:2017 - 2024年骨科申请人数为1786人。在信号的前两年,平均申请减少了23 (p < 0.001),面试机会减少了3 (p < 0.001),出版物增加了1 (p < 0.001),志愿者经验减少了1 (p < 0.001)。与第一年相比,信号第二年减少了15个申请(p < 0.001),减少了1个面试(p = 0.030),减少了4个志愿者经验(p < 0.001),减少了1个出版物(p = 0.015)。配对率差异无统计学意义。结论:整形外科偏好信号在两年后显著降低了申请人的平均申请、面试机会和课外经历,但不影响匹配成功。这些发现表明,偏好信号仍然是减少项目和申请人申请数量的有效方法,同时在两年后为申请人创造公平的机会。证据等级:iii级回顾性队列研究。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参见作者说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Evolution and Impact of Preference Signaling on Orthopaedic Residency After Two Years.

Background: Residency programs have begun to offer preference signaling as a method for applicants to demonstrate commitment to programs. Orthopaedic surgery, which began signaling in 2022, allows applicants to use up to 30 signals. Early studies have evaluated the effects of signaling, demonstrating decreased application volume, varying effects on interviews, and high levels of applicant and faculty satisfaction. While the effects of signaling are beginning to be studied, multiple year evaluations are absent from the literature. The purpose of this study was to explore the impacts of signaling on the orthopaedic surgery match over its first two years.

Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using a prospectively collected Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency database. The database contains survey data from 2017 to 2024 including applicants' demographics, academic performance, and application data. Applicants were first placed into cohorts comparing presignaling and postsignaling data. A second analysis organized applicants into the first year and second year of signaling. Cohorts were compared using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and independent samples t-tests.

Results: There were 1786 orthopaedic surgery applicants from 2017 to 2024. In the first two years of signaling, the mean applications decreased by 23 (p < 0.001), interview offers decreased by three (p < 0.001), publications increased by one (p < 0.001), and volunteer experiences decreased by one (p < 0.001). When compared with the first year, the second year of signaling decreased applications by 15 (p < 0.001), decreased interviews by one (p = 0.030), decreased volunteer experiences by four (p < 0.001), and decreased publications by one (p = 0.015). There was no significant difference in match rate.

Conclusions: Orthopaedic surgery preference signaling after two years significantly decreased mean applications, interview opportunities, and extracurricular experiences of applicants without affecting match success. These findings suggest that preference signaling continues to be an effective method at reducing application volume for programs and applicants while creating equitable opportunities for applicants after two years.

Level of evidence: Level III-Retrospective Cohort Study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
JBJS Open Access
JBJS Open Access Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信