Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33786268›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2021

Analysis of Reapplications to Integrated and Independent Plastic Surgery Residency.

Anooj A Patel, Michael S Wong, Vu T Nguyen, Jeffrey E Janis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Implications of the Shifting Landscape of Plastic Surgery Training Paradigms.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Preference Signaling: Does It Work? A MultispecialtyReview of the Data.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Deconstructing the Excellent Plastic Surgeon: A Survey of Key Attributes.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Anooj A PatelCase Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio.
Michael S WongDepartment of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, University of California Davis Health, Sacramento, Calif.
Vu T NguyenDepartment of Plastic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa.
Jeffrey E JanisDepartment of Plastic Surgery, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPlastic surgery is one of the most competitive specialties to match, with integrated plastic surgery having the highest rate of unmatched applicants in all categorical specialties. Unmatched applicants face difficult challenges, especially because there is a lack of data to help inform and guide both reapplicants and their advisors.

methodA national survey targeting plastic surgery applicants to both integrated and independent tracks from 2014 to 2020 was conducted in August 2020 to identify reapplicants, their application characteristics, and their outcomes.

resultsEighteen of the 54 (33.3%) integrated reapplicants responded to the survey, as well as 7 of the 42 (16.7%) independent reapplicants. Fifty percent of integrated reapplicants and 43% of independent reapplicants successfully eventually matched. For integrated reapplicants, the mean (SD) number of first cycle invites was the greatest predictor of eventual match success, 9.00 (5.93) invites for reapplicants that eventually successfully matched compared with 2.89 (2.89) for those that remained unmatched,

conclusionsReapplication to both integrated and independent plastic surgery may result in worse matching outcomes compared with the initial match. Applicants should attempt to preemptively address potential initial application weaknesses as reapplication after a failed initial attempt may carry disadvantages.

Identifiers

PMID33786268
PMCPMC7994013

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.