ReviewJB & JS open access
Research Fellowships for Unmatched Orthopaedic Applicants: What Can They Expect?
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Preresidency Fellowships in Neurosurgery: A Multi-Institutional, Cross-Sectional Survey of Utility and Outcomes.Neurosurgery practice · 2026Review
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
Introduction: Unmatched orthopaedic surgery applicants often pursue research fellowships to strengthen their residency applications. The aims of this study were to (1) report the trend of the number of orthopaedic research fellowships offered online between 2019 and 2024, (2) describe the characteristics of research fellowships available to unmatched applicants, and (3) assess the quality of support received by unmatched applicants who complete research fellowships. Methods: An online orthopaedic forum was retrospectively reviewed to identify job postings for medical student research fellowships in the 2019 to 2020 and 2024 to 2025 academic years. Information regarding expected mentorship and funding described in these postings was collected. Surveys were administered electronically to assess the funding received and perceived levels of mentor advocacy among unmatched orthopaedic applicants who had completed research fellowships between 2022 and 2024. Results: The number of orthopaedic research fellowships offered online increased by 165% (54-143) between 2019 and 2024, corresponding with a rate of 18 new fellowships offered per year. For the 2024 to 2025 academic year, 80 fellowships (56%) were available to unmatched applicants. The minority of online postings for these positions described support in the match (49%), the specific amount of funding offered (36%), a successful match track record for prior fellows (20%), and contact information of current or prior fellows (11%). The average amount of publicly offered funding was $32,537 (range, $18,000 to $65,000). Among 31 unmatched applicants who responded, the average amount of funding received was $38,180 ± 11,719. Most respondents rated advocacy from research fellowship mentors as high (53%) or moderate (40%), met with their mentors weekly or biweekly (63%), and received feedback on their residency applications (83%). Conclusion: Over the past 5 years, the number of orthopaedic research fellowships available to unmatched applicants has more than doubled. Although perceived advocacy was rated highly by most unmatched research fellows, fewer than half of the online postings for these positions provided details regarding financial compensation and support during the match cycle. Improvements in transparency related to fellowship characteristics are warranted to assist unmatched orthopaedic applicants in making informed decisions when pursuing research years between match cycles. Level of Evidence: N/A.
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.