ArticleJournal of medical education and curricular development
Escalating Research Output After the USMLE Step 1 Pass/Fail Transition: Implications for Equity, Ethics, and the Orthopaedic Residency Match.
Article in Journal of medical education and curricular development. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Orthopaedic surgery remains one of the most competitive residency specialties in the United States. Following the 2022 transition of USMLE Step 1 to pass/fail, research output (RO) has emerged as a prominent screening metric for residency selection. However, longitudinal trends in RO and the impact of this policy change on applicant behavior have not been fully characterized. Methods: Aggregate data from the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) Charting Outcomes in the Match reports from 2014 to 2024 were analyzed for U.S. allopathic applicants to orthopaedic surgery. RO was defined as the self-reported number of peer-reviewed publications, abstracts, and poster presentations. Descriptive analyses were performed, and linear trend modeling compared RO growth before the Step 1 policy change (2014-2020) and after implementation (2022-2024). Results: Average RO among matched applicants increased by 255% over the study period, rising from 6.7 in 2014 to 23.8 in 2024. Unmatched applicants demonstrated similar upward trends but consistently reported lower RO. From 2014 to 2020, RO increased modestly at approximately 1.3 research products per year. Following the Step 1 pass/fail transition, RO growth accelerated sharply to approximately 5.2 products per year between 2022 and 2024. During this period, matched applicants experienced a 44.24% increase in RO and reported 32% higher RO than unmatched applicants by 2024. Conclusions: Research output among orthopaedic residency applicants has risen dramatically over the past decade, with a pronounced acceleration following the Step 1 transition to pass/fail. These findings suggest a shift toward research quantity as a dominant selection metric, raising concerns regarding sustainability, equity, burnout, and ethical authorship practices. Ongoing ERAS reforms and adoption of holistic review frameworks may be necessary to ensure fair, meaningful, and transparent residency selection in orthopaedic surgery.
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.