ArticleBMC medical education2025
Impact of parallel planning on residency match rate success.
Article in BMC medical education, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedical students targeting competitive specialties or those with lower competitiveness for their preferred specialty are encouraged to parallel apply to a less competitive field. The AAMC provides data on the number of applicants who parallel apply but little information exists on their match success.
objectiveOur objective is to describe the success rates for students who parallel apply to more than one specialty.
methodsFollowing IRB exemption, a retrospective cohort study of Indiana University School of Medicine graduates from the 2021-2024 residency match cycles was conducted. ERAS data and match reports were reviewed to identify students who parallel applied to more than one specialty, determining their match outcomes. Subgroup analyses were performed based on specialty type, and descriptive statistics were reported.
resultsBetween 2021 and 2024, 1,411 IUSM students applied for the match, with 225 (16%) having a parallel plan; 39% of these students matched into their preferred specialty, 56% into their parallel specialty, and 5% did not match. The most common parallel plan specialties were Anesthesiology, Orthopaedic Surgery, and OBGYN. There were no statistically significant differences in parallel application rates among surgical, hospital-based, and primary care specialties.
conclusionsOur study shows that 1 in 6 students will apply to a parallel specialty, with more than half matching into their parallel plan, making it a viable strategy for those targeting competitive specialties or with lower competitiveness. We found no difference in application rates between surgical, hospital-based, and primary care specialties, emphasizing the need for individualized competitiveness guidance.
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.