National survey of internal medicine residency programs of their 1st-year experience with the electronic residency application service and national resident match program changes

How well did our students match? A peer-validated quantitative assessment of medical school match success: the match quality score

Background: Assessment of an individual medical school's performance in the match is an important outcome of the educational program. Unfortunately, student rank lists are not public. A method to objectively gauge the quality of an institution's match regardless of student preference has not been described in the literature.Objective: This manuscript serves to determine the relative weights of included variables and derive a statistically valid Match Quality Score (MQS).Design: Between 2016 and 2018, student affairs experts derived from a national cohort validated the MQS by scoring factitious mini-match lists that covered three variables: student's Match Status, specialty Competitiveness, and residency program Reputation.Results: Of the variables assessed, only Match Status and Competitiveness were found to be significant. We derived the resulting coefficients for the Match Quality Score (MQS) as: [3.74A (# students successfully matched) + 2.34B (# students matching into their initial specialty in the SOAP process) + 1.77C (# students who secured a SOAP position in another specialty) + 0.26D (# students matching into a specialty where there are more applicants than spots)]/Total # students.Conclusions: The MQS is a potentially useful educational outcome measurement for US medical schools and may be considered as an outcome measure for continuous quality improvement to tailor future institutional changes to training, mentoring, and student-advising programs.

Immediate impact of participation in the electronic residency application service on a fellowship program

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to evaluate the immediate impact of participation in the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) on a single cardiology fellowship program.

METHOD

The study reviewed all applications (n = 1824) made to the Geisinger Medical Center cardiology fellowship program over a 4-year period (2004-2007). The aggregate data for the first 2 years (pre-ERAS, 2004 and 2005) was compared to that of the last 2 years (post-ERAS, 2006 and 2007).

RESULTS

Compared to the pre-ERAS period, the total number of applications in the post-ERAS period increased by 49% (732 versus 1092; p<.05) and the number of complete applications increased by 70% (577 versus 983; p<.05). Other significant differences (p<.05) included a higher percentage of applications from female candidates (81 of 732 [11%] versus 186 of 1092 [17%]), and a greater geographic distance from applicants' internal medicine residency institutions (420 ± 454 miles versus 585 ± 559 miles]. Comparison of applicants' age, citizenship status, graduation origin, years since medical school graduation, and United States Medical Licensing Examination scores yielded no significant differences between pre-ERAS and post-ERAS periods.

CONCLUSION

Participation in ERAS resulted in an immediate increase in the total number of applications, higher proportion of applications with complete data, a higher number and proportion of female applicants, and a wider geographic distribution of applications. This likely reflects ease of application submission through a central electronic service. However, the administrative burden on fellowship programs and the effects of wider geographic distribution of applications on the fellowship-matching process merit further evaluation.

USMLE Step 2 performance and test administration date in the fourth year of medical school

PURPOSE

To determine whether the time interval between completing the third-year curriculum and test administration affects a student's USMLE Step 2 score.

METHOD

Scores for 846 students in the classes of 2000-2004 were grouped in ten time periods depending on test date. A linear regression model to predict performance on Step 2 using gender, Step 1, and grades in medicine, pediatrics and obstetrics-gynecology was developed based on the class of 1999. Analysis of covariance was used to test the effect of time on scores, adjusting for predicted performance.

RESULTS

Step 2 scores decreased significantly (p <.001) across time. Students' mean scores were four points higher than predicted in the early months and five to eight points lower near the end of the senior year.

CONCLUSIONS

Students who scheduled Step 2 early in the senior year achieved higher scores, on average, than those who waited until later in the year.