ArticleOTO open
Analyzing Otolaryngology Signaling Match Trends Between 2018-2024 With Other Surgical Specialties.
Article in OTO open. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Otolaryngology (OTO) remains one of the most competitive surgical specialties, with limited residency positions. In 2021, a 25-program preference signaling system was introduced to enhance communication between applicants and programs. This study evaluates how signaling affects application metrics. Study Design: Retrospective database study. Setting: Texas Seeking Transparency in Application to Residency (STAR) program, 2021 to 2024. Methods: Statistical analysis in R (v4.3.3) included descriptive statistics, ANOVA for comparing continuous variables across match years, and Results: From 2021 to 2024, there were 393 respondents, representing 26.77% of all OTO positions. Preference signaling use among matched applicants rose from under 25% in 2021 to 95.7% in 2024. Nonsignaling applicants had more publications (6.31 ± 3.74 vs 5.30 ± 3.78, Conclusion: Applicants with fewer traditional strengths, such as research and volunteering, were more likely to match using preference signaling. Strategic signaling may improve chances of matching into OTO. The decline in application numbers suggests growing trust in the signaling process from both applicants and programs.
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.