Factors Considered When Ranking Military Orthopedic Surgery Residency Candidates

A Linguistic Analysis of United States Navy Orthopaedic Surgery Applicant Personal Statements

INTRODUCTION

Despite the importance of linguistic analysis, no systematic research has been explored in the form of linguistic analysis on personal statements for military orthopedic surgery residency programs. This study was conducted to analyze U.S. Navy (USN) orthopedic surgery applicants' personal statements using an automated textual analysis program to assess personal statements for linguistic styles.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of USN orthopedic applicant personal statements from application years 2016 to 2019 was performed utilizing the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count (LIWC) software. LIWC analyzed the text for summary variables: analytical thinking, clout, authenticity, and emotional tone. We compared this analysis with Step 1 and Step 2 scores and determined whether an applicant matched.

RESULTS

A total of 94 personal statements (60,230 words) were analyzed using LIWC. The average word count was 640.7, with an average of 23 words per sentence. The average-matched applicant USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 scores were 240 and 250, respectively. When examining summary traits utilizing multiple logistic regression analysis, only analytical thinking demonstrated a statistically significant difference in matched versus unmatched applicants with a P = .011 (OR = 1.10).

CONCLUSION

As the USMLE Step 1 exam transitions from a scoring system to Pass/Fail grading, programs will look at other characteristics to determine who would likely succeed in residency. From a linguistic analysis standpoint, matched applicants' personal statements demonstrated higher analytical thinking, clout, affiliation, power, and risk focus than unmatched applicants. Unmatched applicants demonstrated higher authenticity than matched applicants.

Factors influencing the selection criteria of Saudi board orthopedic surgery applicants: a national survey of program directors

BACKGROUND

Annually, medical students vie to secure a seat with an orthopedic residency program. This rigorous competition places orthopedic surgery as one of the most competitive specialties in the medical field. Although several international studies have been published regarding the factors that influence program directors when choosing their ideal applicant, the data for Saudi Arabia in that regard is absent.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, we aimed to survey all orthopedic program directors regarding the factors that influence them when choosing their ideal orthopedic surgery applicant. A survey was sent to all program directors via email during the month of August 2022. A reminder was sent 2 weeks later to maximize the response rate. The survey was completed by 22 out of 36 orthopedic program directors, which gave us a response rate of 61.11%.

RESULTS

In this study, 22 orthopedic surgery program directors responded to our survey. When program directors were asked to rank the factors of residency selection criteria, the top ranked factors were good impression on interviews; prior experience in orthopedic surgery with, for example, electives; and performance on ethical questions during interviews, with means of 9.18, 8.95, and 8.82 out of 10, respectively. Furthermore, program directors preferred letters of recommendation from recommenders that they personally know, clinical experience such as electives taken at the program director's institution, and the quality of publications as the most important aspects of research. Most program directors (90.9%) relied on their residents' and fellows' opinions when selecting candidates, and 77.3% did not think gender has an influence on selection of applicants.

CONCLUSION

By providing comprehensive data regarding the factors that influence and attract program directors of orthopedic surgery when choosing residency candidates. With the data provided by this study, applicants for orthopedic surgery have the advantage of early planning to build a strong application that may help persuade program directors to choose them.

Matching into Orthopedic Surgery in the U.S. Navy: A Review of Applicant Selection Criteria

INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Navy offers an attractive opportunity for residency training in orthopedic surgery. The factors that Navy orthopedic residency program leadership finds important in applicant selection for training have not been reported. Additionally, data regarding the academic competitiveness of recently matched applicants have not been previously published. This study presents the results of two surveys administered to all navy orthopedic program directors and department chairmen, as well as data for United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Steps 1 and 2, medical school class percentile, leadership responsibilities, research endeavors, and letters of recommendation of both matched and unmatched applicants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two anonymous surveys were administered to all program directors and department chairmen at Navy orthopedic residency training programs with questions designed to gauge perceived importance of various application factors when selecting for the match. The results were compiled, and mean levels of importance were reported. Deidentified data were collected on all applicants to Navy orthopedic residency programs from 2015 to 2019. Data points specific to USMLE Step 1 and 2 board scores, medical school class percentile, research, leadership, and letters of recommendation were analyzed using single and multiple logistic regression analyses, and odds ratios for each variable were calculated.

RESULTS

Navy leadership unanimously expressed that clerkship performance at the individual program director's institution was most important, followed by Steps 1 and 2 licensing examination scores. Single logistic regression analyses showed that Step 1 score and clinical, leadership, and recommendation scores were statistically significant. When controlled for Step 1 score, only academic performance and leadership scores maintained statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Applicants to Navy orthopedic surgery residency programs should strive to be competitive in all aspects of their application, with specific emphasis placed on outstanding performance during orthopedic clerkships, demonstration of leadership characteristics, and academic excellence. With transition to a pass/fail grading system for Step 1, there will be more emphasis on other measures of academic success, such as Step 2 scores and clinical clerkship grades.

Potential Impact of Pass/Fail Scores on USMLE Step 1: Predictors of Excellence in Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Training

AIM

The study aims to determine resident applicant metrics most predictive of academic and clinical performance as measured by the Council of Resident Education in Obstetrics and Gynecology (CREOG) examination scores and Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) clinical performance (Milestones) in the aftermath of United States Medical Licensing Examination Scores (USMLE) Step 1 becoming a pass/fail examination.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, electronic and paper documents for Wayne State University Obstetrics and Gynecology residents matriculated over a 5-year period ending July 2018 were collected. USMLE scores, clerkship grade, and wording on the letters of recommendation as well as Medical Student Performance Evaluation (MSPE) were extracted from the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) and scored numerically. Semiannual Milestone evaluations and yearly CREOG scores were used as a marker of resident performance. Statistical analysis on residents (n = 75) was performed using R and SPSS and significance was set at P < .05.

RESULTS

Mean USMLE score correlated with CREOG performance and, of all 3 Steps, Step 1 had the tightest association. MSPE and class percentile also correlated with CREOGs. Clerkship grade and recommendation letters had no correlation with resident performance. Of all metrics provided by ERAS, none taken alone, were as useful as Step 1 scores at predicting performance in residency. Regression modeling demonstrated that the combination of Step 2 scores with MSPE wording restored the predictive ability lost by Step 1.

CONCLUSIONS

The change of USMLE Step 1 to pass/fail may alter resident selection strategies. Other objective markers are needed in order to evaluate an applicant's future performance in residency.