ArticleAcademic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges2025
Holistic Review in Applicant Selection: A Scoping Review.
Article in Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pre-residency research productivity and its impact on admission to top-tier U.S. residency programs: a meta-analysis across specialties in surgical education.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- A qualitative exploration of first-in-family medical students' decisions to partake in noncurricular activities.Medical education · 2026Article
- A socioecological framework for physician advocacy: motivators, enablers, and barriers.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2026Article
- Examining Differential Rater Functioning and Bias in the Holistic Review of Residency Applications.Journal of graduate medical education · 2026Article
- SDAMPP report #1: Holistic review for medical physics residency applicant selection.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2026Article
- Transparency of Alpha Omega Alpha Selection Processes and Bias Mitigation Across US Medical Schools: A Cross-Sectional Mixed Methods Study.Journal of general internal medicine · 2026Article
- "We Co-Created This Mess": Letters Between UME and GME.Journal of graduate medical education · 2026Article
- A Comparison of Holistic Application Review versus Keyword Search for Residency Application Review.Academic psychiatry : the journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry · 2026Article
- The impact of GenAI on applicant behaviour, performance, and interview reliability during virtual interviews for medical school admissions.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Considerations for the equitable selection of thoracic surgery residents and fellows.JTCVS open · 2025Article
- Tipping the Scales: Quantifying the Impact of USMLE Step 1 Pass/Fail Scoring on Application Interpretation in the Integrated Plastic Surgery Match.Journal of surgical education · 2025Article
- Board scores in the spotlight: Public reporting and the unintended consequences.AEM education and training · 2025Article
- Investigating the Road to Equity: A Scoping Review of Solutions to Mitigate Implicit Bias in Assessment within Medical Education.Perspectives on medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo avoid overreliance on metrics and better identify candidates who add value to the learning environment, some medical schools and residency programs have begun using holistic review for screening and selection, but limited data support or refute this use. This scoping review examines holistic review definitions and practice in medical education, summarizes research findings, and identifies gaps for future research.
methodThe authors searched 7 databases using a comprehensive search strategy including the keywords holistic, attributes, mission-based, mission-centric , and socially accountable for articles on holistic review within undergraduate medical education (UME) and graduate medical education (GME) published from database inception through July 5, 2024. Author pairs independently screened articles for inclusion and extracted data. Discrepancies were resolved via discussion. Quantitative and qualitative synthesis was performed.
results6,511 articles were identified, with 33 included in this review. Twenty-five studies (76%) focused exclusively on GME, with only a few assessing holistic review in UME. Holistic review was implemented at 3 main stages: screening, interviewing, and ranking. Common rationales included service patterns, patient-physician identity concordance, enhancing patient trust, professional advocacy, and educational benefits. Holistic review elements varied, with most falling within the Association of American Medical Colleges experiences, attributes, and metrics framework. Nearly all studies reported an increase in the percentage of underrepresented in medicine trainees interviewed or selected. Several studies also demonstrated increases in other groups (e.g., women, lower socioeconomic status). Many studies included additional interventions to promote diversity, limiting the ability to assess holistic review in isolation.
conclusionsThis scoping review summarizes the literature on the rationale, development and implementation process, structure and components, outcomes assessed, barriers, and strategies for success for holistic review. This work can inform institutions and departments seeking to develop or refine their own holistic review systems and serve as a nidus for future research.
Indexed as
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.