Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41929647›Full record

ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026

The Future of Resident Unionization.

Aidan M Fitzgerald, Lawrence Scott Levin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. The Future of Resident Unionization.Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open · 2026
    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

2 authors.

Aidan M FitzgeraldFrom the Department of Plastic Surgery, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Lawrence Scott LevinUniversity of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Burnout is a recognized phenomenon among residents and attending surgeons in the United States, resulting in physical and mental exhaustion. Residents see a reduction in working hours as being essential to deal with this issue. Consequently, residents have unionized to improve collective bargaining power and advocacy with employers to achieve their aims. Unionization has proved controversial and spawned generational conflict within the profession. Older attending surgeons suggest that such unionization demeans the profession, as it is at odds with their sense of vocation and "nostalgic" professionalism. Residents and younger attending surgeons are not prepared to make the same commitments as their predecessors given the increased work-life balance they crave, reflecting the new societal norm. The United States must heed the lessons from those who have traveled this road previously. In the United Kingdom, working hours have significantly reduced in recent decades, requiring moves away from apprentice-style resident training towards a more remote shift pattern style of working. This has resulted in unintended consequences: (1) disruption of the "hidden" curriculum through which professionalism was previously taught and (2) an isolated and demoralized resident workforce. This tension reflects a breakdown in the social contract among medicine, society, and government that, if not addressed in the United States, may result in continued discord, as recently manifested by resident strikes in the United Kingdom. Looking forward, United States training programs should ensure that any changes in working hours must maintain teamwork between residents and attending surgeons, not only for their own well-being but also for that of their patients.

Identifiers

PMID41929647
PMCPMC13043255

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.