Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37063934›Full record

ReviewJB & JS open access

Differences in the Academic Attributes of Matched and Unmatched Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Applicants are Narrowing.

Suleiman Y Sudah, Nareena Imam, Francis Sirch, Allen D Nicholson, Surena Namdari, Mariano E Menendez

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

6 authors.

Suleiman Y SudahDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, New Jersey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4412-4753
Nareena ImamDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1235-4274
Francis SirchDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, New Jersey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4084-0245
Allen D NicholsonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, New Jersey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2178-9277
Surena NamdariDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rothman Orthopaedic Institute, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8222-554X
Mariano E MenendezOregon Shoulder Institute, Medford, Oregon.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Orthopaedic surgery remains one of the most competitive residency specialties, with the number of applicants outpacing the availability of residency positions each year. The purpose of this study was to analyze present-day orthopaedic surgery match data, identify differences between matched and unmatched applicants, and compare our findings to previous trends. Methods: Applicant data from the National Resident Matching Program from 2016 to 2022 were analyzed. The number of matched and unmatched US allopathic senior orthopaedic applicants relative to the number of available positions was used to determine respective match rates. Performance metrics and applicant characteristics were compared by match status. Trends were compared with those of previous analysis from 2006 to 2014. Results: The number of applicants increased from 863 in 2016 to 1,068 in 2022. The match rate decreased from 75% in 2016 to 66% in 2022 (p < 0.0001). Matched applicants had a higher number of contiguous ranks (12.3 vs. 6.5; p < 0.001), United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step-1 score (248 vs. 240; p < 0.001), USMLE Step-2 score (255 vs. 247; p < 0.001), Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) membership (38% vs. 13%; p < 0.001), and enrollment at a top 40 National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded medical school (34% vs. 24%, p < 0.001). Compared with 2006 to 2014 data, a smaller percentage of matched applicants were enrolled in a top 40 NIH-funded medical school (34% vs. 37%, p = 0.013). The mean differences in USMLE Step-1 score (16 vs. 8.25 points, p < 0.001) and USMLE Step-2 score (16 vs. 8.25 points, p = 0.002) in favor of matched applicants nearly halved compared with that in 2006 to 2014. In addition, there was no longer a significant difference in the number of research products (abstracts, presentations, posters, and publications) between matched and unmatched applicants (p = 0.309). Conclusions: Differences in the academic attributes of matched and unmatched orthopaedic surgery applicants have become less profound over time, making it increasingly difficult to predict a successful match based on USMLE Step scores, AOA membership, research productivity, and medical school research reputation. Future studies should evaluate differences in subjective metrics (e.g., away rotation and interview performance and letters of recommendation) by match status.

Identifiers

PMID37063934
PMCPMC10090792

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.