ReviewJB & JS open access
Where Should I Signal? A Program-Level Analysis of Preference Signaling in the Orthopaedic Surgery Residency Match.
Review in JB & JS open access. 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
Background: Orthopaedic surgery is among the most competitive specialties in the US residency match. Preference signaling was introduced in 2023 with hopes of reducing application volume and improving efficiency. While overall applications have declined, little is known about how signals are distributed across programs. Methods: Data from the Association of American Medical Colleges Residency Explorer Tool were analyzed. Application volumes from 2021 to 2025, program characteristics, percentage of applicants signaling, and interview invitation rates were collected for each program. Program tier quintiles were determined using Doximity rankings. Application and signal densities (applications or signals per available position) were calculated for each program, and averages were compared across program tier, setting, size, and geography. Results: Average application density decreased from 139.18 applications per position in 2021 to 95.84 in 2025, despite an increase in applicants. The average signal density was 61.22 signals per position. Signal and application densities were highest in community-based, lower-tier, smaller nonmetropolitan programs and lowest in university-based, higher-tier, larger, metropolitan programs. Interview rates averaged 23% for signaling applicants and 2% for nonsignaling applicants. Conclusions: The introduction of preference signaling has coincided with reduced application volume to orthopaedic residency programs. Program-level data suggest a trend of disproportionate signaling to community-based, lower Doximity rank, smaller, and nonmetropolitan programs, providing insight for applicants and programs navigating the evolving orthopaedic residency match.
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.