ArticleAEM education and training2026
The "Home-Field" Advantage: Do Interns From the Same Institution Perform Better on the Milestones?
Article in AEM education and training, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The "Home-Field" Advantage: Do Interns From the Same Institution Perform Better on the Milestones?AEM education and training · 2026Article
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
Objectives: The transition between undergraduate medical education (UME) and residency can be fraught. Residents who match into a program affiliated with their medical school may benefit from being in a familiar working environment, among faculty aware of the residents' capabilities. This study examines whether learning assessments reveal a "home-field" advantage for intern-year residents who train in Emergency Medicine (EM) programs affiliated with the medical school they graduated from. Recent studies have shown increasing preferences by programs and applicants for the "home field." Yet, it is unclear whether the preference for the home field has benefits for matriculants who match into a "home-field" residency. Methods: This is a retrospective national cohort study of intern-year assessments using the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's Milestones at the Mid- and End-Year assessment periods. All accredited EM residency programs aligned with the medical school of interns who entered residency in 2021 or 2022 were included. Mixed-effects regression and mixed-effects logistic regression estimated differences in Milestones performance, including whether residents were at or above the "novice" level expected for first-year residents (not assessed as "Not Yet Completed Level 1"). Results: A total of 5905 residents entered 275 EM programs. Overall, 8.6% of residents matched into home-field programs (2021: 9.1%; 2022: 8.1%). Home-field residents earned modest advantages in mid-year Interpersonal Communication ( Conclusion: "Home-field" advantage is evident in EM residency at the mid-year and end-year assessment periods. While differences in Milestone assessments were modest, there were substantial differences in not reaching the expected novice level for supervised practice.
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.