ArticleCanadian medical education journal2026
Scholarly activity in Canadian Residency Matching Service criteria: do Canadian programs really care about applicant research?
Article in Canadian medical education journal, 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.
- Motivations to conduct research and burnout in medical education: some different viewpoints.Canadian medical education journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Residency programs across Canada evaluate applicants based on written applications, reference letters, and interviews. One key factor many institutions consider is "scholarly activity." To improve transparency, the Canadian Residency Matching Service (CaRMS) recently revised its program description pages, adding a dedicated section outlining expectations for research and academic work. This study examines whether these changes have made program criteria clearer for applicants. Methods: For all 17 Canadian faculties of medicine, 2023 R1 entry, -internal medicine, family medicine, pediatrics, general surgery, psychiatry and anesthesiology-program descriptions were reviewed on the CaRMS website, looking for keywords related to scholarly activity. Results: Although most residency programs now include scholarly activity in their CaRMS descriptions, several programs provide vague descriptions of this requirement. In 2023, nearly all family medicine (94%), internal medicine (100%), and pediatrics (100%) program descriptions referenced requiring or considering scholarly work as part of their selection process-up from 41%, 65%, and 71% in 2019. Programs commonly mentioned scholarly activity in two or three sections of their selection criteria, with key themes including active scholarly work, scholarly deliverables, and future scholarly potential. Conclusion: Canadian medical schools should set clearer expectations for scholarly activity in residency applications to ensure transparency and equal opportunities for all applicants. Programs could also explain why research matters-whether as a core component of training or to develop critical thinking and initiative. Greater clarity would help applicants see research as more than just a "check-the-box" requirement, fostering genuine engagement in scholarly work.
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.