Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40145919›Full record

ArticleThe western journal of emergency medicine2025

Push and Pull: What Factors Attracted Applicants to Emergency Medicine and What Factors Pushed Them Away Following the 2023 Match.

Michael Kiemeney, James Morris, Lauren Lamparter, Moshe Weizberg, Andy Little, Brian Milman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The western journal of emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Michael KiemeneyLoma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, California.
James MorrisTexas Tech University Health Sciences Center, Lubbock, Texas.
Lauren LamparterUniversity of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Moshe WeizbergStaten Island University, Staten Island, New York.
Andy LittleAdventHealth East Orlando, Orlando, Florida.
Brian MilmanUniversity of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Emergency medicine (EM) historically enjoyed a nearly 100% match rate. A rapid change saw 46% of EM programs with one or more unfilled positions after the 2023 Match. Much has been discussed about potential causes, and characteristics of unfilled programs have been investigated. We surveyed recent applicants to EM to further understand what continues to draw them to EM and what concerns deter them from choosing a career in EM. Methods: A cross-sectional, mixed methods survey was distributed in the summer of 2023 to a convenience sample of respondents via the listservs of national EM resident and student organizations as well as clerkship directors in EM. We did not calculate response rate due to listserv convenience sampling. A total of 213 responses were received, representing 7.7% of the total number of EM applicants (2,765) in 2023. Applicants were asked to rank from 1 to 5 their experiences with EM and the characteristics of the specialty that were important in their career decision. We calculated means and 95% confidence intervals for quantitative results. We performed qualitative analysis of free-text responses to identify themes. Results: Positive factors for applicants were interactions with EM faculty (4.29 on 1-5 scale) and residents (4.42) as well as clinical experiences in third-year (4.53) and fourth-year clerkships (4.62). Applicants continue to be drawn to EM by the variety of pathology encountered (4.66), flexible lifestyle (4.63), and high-acuity patient care (4.43). Most applicants (68.5%) experienced advisement away from EM. Of those who received negative advisement, non-emergency physicians were the most common source (73.3%). Factors negatively influencing a career choice in EM were corporate influence (2.51), ED crowding (2.52), burnout (2.59), presence of advanced practice practitioners (APP) in EM (2.63), and workforce concerns (2.85). Job concerns stemming from the 2021 EM workforce report were identified by respondents as the primary reason for recent Match results. Conclusion: Applicants noted clinical experiences in the emergency department and interactions with EM attendings and residents as positive experiences. High-acuity patient care, variety of pathology, and flexible lifestyle continue to attract applicants. Applicants identified EM workforce concerns as the primary contributor to recent EM Match results. Corporate influence, ED crowding, burnout, and presence of APPs in the ED were also significant issues.

Indexed as

Career ChoiceEmergency MedicineInternship and ResidencyAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleStudents, MedicalSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID40145919
PMCPMC11931693

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.