ReviewThe American surgeon2025
Evaluating the Factors Influencing Residency Match for Surgical Specialty Applicants and Programs: Challenges and Future Directions.
Review in The American surgeon, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It carries an expression of concern. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Matched and Measured: An In-depth Look at the Interventional Cardiology Fellowship Match-Fellows' Perspective.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Article
- OpenSpineConsortium: An Open-Source Framework for Medical Student Engagement in Computational Spine Imaging Research.Cureus · 2026Article
- Analysis of Plastic Surgery Publications Among Successfully Matched Integrated Plastic Surgery Residents.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026Article
- Two-Tiered Grading in Required Clerkships: Understanding the Why and Results of Making This Change.Cureus · 2026Article
- PubMed-Indexed Productivity of Matched Orthopedic Surgery Applicants Before and After Step 1 Scoring Transition.Cureus · 2025Article
- What Do Medical Students Think About a Pass/Fail USMLE Step 1? A Survey of 18 Allopathic Schools.Journal of medical education and curricular developmentArticle
Corrections and comments
- Expression of concern
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
IntroductionWe aim to evaluate the impact of recent changes in the residency matching process on surgical specialties' applicants and programs to offer recommendations on residency selection and matching processes.MethodsWe utilized five databases while employing a Boolean query to search for studies from 2015 to March 2024. The search selection focused on factors and recent changes influencing residency match results across surgical specialties, including USMLE Step 1 pass/fail, research productivity, interview structure, and preference and geographic signaling.ResultsThe shift of the USMLE Step 1 to a pass/fail scoring system revealed a consensus among surgical program directors (PDs) and applicants not in favor of the change due to the emphasis on additional application elements. Research productivity was identified as a significant factor, especially in neurosurgery (with an average of 18.3 publications per applicant) and vascular surgery (8.3 publications), indicating a positive correlation between the number of publications and match outcomes. The adoption of virtual interviews has been well-received by both applicants and PDs, leading to an increase in the number of interviews offered and applicants. The implementation of preference and geographic signaling mechanisms has improved interview rates for applicants who utilize them.ConclusionThe transition to a pass/fail USMLE Step 1 has raised concerns among surgical specialties, necessitating a greater focus on Step 2 scores and research productivity. Virtual interviews and signaling have improved the accessibility and reach of the residency application process, however, the full impact of these changes on the perception of applicant-program fit remains unclear.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38900926What 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.