ReviewJB & JS open access
Identification of Factors Associated with Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Programs That Preferentially Match Students Who Performed an Elective Rotation Before the Interview Process.
Review in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The role of elective rotations in the orthopaedic residency selection process varies between programs. Our study aims to identify factors associated with residency programs that interview and match a greater proportion of applicants who have completed an elective rotation with their program. Methods: Data were collected through the American Orthopaedic Association's Orthopaedic Residency Information Network database. Bivariate correlations and multivariate regression models were used to identify independent predictors of programs with a greater proportion of interviewees or residents who completed an elective rotation at the respective program. Results: One hundred seventy-eight of the 218 existing residency programs were included in this study. Programs that offered fewer interviews and more away rotation positions per year were associated with a greater odds of its interviewees (OR = 0.36, p = 0.01; OR = 4.55, p < 0.001, respectively) and residents (OR = 0.44, p = 0.04; OR = 4.23, p < 0.001, respectively) having completed an elective rotation with the program. In addition, programs with fewer attendings (OR = 0.39, p = 0.03) and in-person interviews (OR = 3.04, p = 0.04) matched a greater proportion of their rotators. However, programs that interviewed applicants during the elective rotation were less likely to match their rotators (OR = 0.35, p = 0.04). Conclusion: Certain program characteristics independently predict the likelihood of a program interviewing and matching their rotators. These findings may provide information for applicants and programs regarding the rotation process. Level of Evidence: III.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.