scholarly journals Correlation of Ophthalmology Residency Application Characteristics with Subsequent Performance in Residency

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (02) ◽  
pp. e151-e157
Author(s):  
Brett M. Gudgel ◽  
Andrew T. Melson ◽  
Justin Dvorak ◽  
Kai Ding ◽  
R. Michael Siatkowski
Keyword(s):  
Medical School ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Resident Performance ◽  
Subsequent Performance ◽  
University Of Oklahoma ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Application Characteristics ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Residency Application ◽  
Core Clerkship

Abstract Purpose Only from reviewing applications, it is difficult to identify which applicants will be successful ophthalmology residents. The change of the USMLE Step 1 scoring to “Pass/Fail” removes another quantitative metric. We aimed to identify application attributes correlated with successful residency performance. This study also used artificial intelligence (AI) to evaluate letters of recommendation (LOR), the Dean's letter (MSPE), and personal statement (PS). Design Retrospective analysis of application characteristics versus residency performance was conducted. Participants Residents who graduated from the Dean McGee Eye Institute/University of Oklahoma Ophthalmology residency from 2004 to 2019 were included in this study. Methods Thirty-four attributes were recorded from each application. Residents were subjectively ranked into tertiles and top and bottom deciles based on residency performance by faculty present during their training. The Ophthalmic Knowledge Assessment Program (OKAP) examination scores were used as an objective performance metric. Analysis was performed to identify associations between application attributes and tertile/decile ranking. Additional analysis used AI and natural language processing to evaluate applicant LORs, MSPE, and PS. Main Outcome Measures Characteristics from residency applications that correlate with resident performance were the primary outcome of this study. Results Fifty-five residents and 21 faculty members were included. A grade of “A” or “Honors” in the obstetrics/gynecology (OB/GYN) clerkship and the presence of a home ophthalmology department were associated with ranking in the top tertile but not the top decile. Mean core clerkship grades, medical school ranking in the top 25 U.S. News and World Report (USNWR) primary care rankings, and postgraduate year (PGY)-2 and PGY-3 OKAP scores were predictive of being ranked in both the top tertile and the top decile. USMLE scores, alpha-omega-alpha (AOA) status, and number of publications did not correlate with subjective resident performance. AI analysis of LORs, MSPE, and PS did not identify any text features that correlated with resident performance. Conclusions Many metrics traditionally felt to be predictive of residency success (USMLE scores, AOA status, and research) did not predict resident success in our study. We did confirm the importance of core clerkship grades and medical school ranking. Objective measures of success such as PGY-2 and PGY-3 OKAP scores were associated with high subjective ranking.

scholarly journals Analysis of the 1990–2007 neurosurgery residency match: does applicant gender affect neurosurgery match outcome?

2018 ◽  
Vol 129 (2) ◽  
pp. 282-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan R. Durham ◽  
Katelyn Donaldson ◽  
M. Sean Grady ◽  
Deborah L. Benzil
Keyword(s):  
Medical School ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Application Process ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Successful Match ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
Underrepresentation Of Women ◽  
Residency Application

OBJECTIVEWith nearly half of graduating US medical students being female, it is imperative to understand why females typically make up less than 20% of the neurosurgery applicant pool, a number that has changed very slowly over the past several decades. Organized neurosurgery has strongly indicated the desire to overcome the underrepresentation of women, and it is critical to explore whether females are at a disadvantage during the residency application process, one of the first steps in a neurosurgical career. To date, there are no published studies on specific applicant characteristics, including gender, that are associated with match outcome among neurosurgery resident applicants. The purpose of this study is to determine which characteristics of neurosurgery residency applicants, including gender, are associated with a successful match outcome.METHODSDe-identified neurosurgical resident applicant data obtained from the San Francisco Fellowship and Residency Matching Service for the years 1990–2007 were analyzed. Applicant characteristics including gender, medical school attended, year of application, United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 score, Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) status, and match outcome were available for study.RESULTSOf the total 3426 applicants studied, 473 (13.8%) applicants were female and 2953 (86.2%) were male. Two thousand four hundred forty-eight (71.5%) applicants successfully matched. USMLE Step 1 score was the strongest predictor of match outcome with scores > 245 having an OR of 20.84 (95% CI 10.31–42.12) compared with those scoring < 215. The mean USMLE Step 1 score for applicants who successfully matched was 233.2 and was 210.8 for those applicants who did not match (p < 0.001). Medical school rank was also associated with match outcome (p < 0.001). AOA status was not significantly associated with match outcome. Female gender was associated with significantly lower odds of matching in both simple (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.48–0.72) and multivariate analyses (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.34–0.94 CI). USMLE Step 1 scores were significantly lower for females compared to males with a mean score of 230.1 for males and 221.5 for females (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in medical school ranking or AOA status when stratified by applicant gender.CONCLUSIONSThe limited historical applicant data from 1990–2007 suggests that USMLE Step 1 score is the best predictor of match outcome, although applicant gender may also play a role.

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

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 238212052110374
Author(s):  
Sejal Tamakuwala ◽  
Joshua Dean ◽  
Katherine J. Kramer ◽  
Adib Shafi ◽  
Sarah Ottum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Student Performance ◽  
Clinical Performance ◽  
Predictive Ability ◽  
Obstetrics And Gynecology ◽  
Resident Performance ◽  
Application Service ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
Clerkship Grade ◽  
Residency Application

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.

scholarly journals Fourth-Year Medical School Course Load and Success as a Medical Intern

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. Richards ◽  
Kenneth J. Mukamal ◽  
Nikki DeMelo ◽  
C. Christopher Smith
Keyword(s):  
Medical School ◽  
Medical Knowledge ◽  
Intensive Courses ◽  
Course Work ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Medical Licensing ◽  
Course Load ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Intensive Course

ABSTRACT Background  The fourth year of medical school has come under recent scrutiny for its lack of structure, cost- and time-effectiveness, and quality of education it provides. Some have advocated for increasing clinical burden in the fourth year, while others have suggested it be abolished. Objective  To assess the relationship between fourth-year course load and success during internship. Methods  We reviewed transcripts of 78 internal medicine interns from 2011–2013 and compared the number of intensive courses (defined as subinternships, intensive care, surgical clerkships, and emergency medicine rotations) with multi-source performance evaluations from the internship. We assessed relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of achieving excellent scores according to the number of intensive courses taken, using generalized estimating equations, adjusting for demographics, US Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 board scores, and other measures of medical school performance. Results  For each additional intensive course taken, the RR of obtaining an excellent score per intensive course was 1.05 (95% CI 1.03–1.07, P &lt; .001), whereas the RR per nonintensive course taken was 0.99 (95% CI 0.98–1.00, P = .03). An association of intensive course work with increased risk of excellent performance was seen across multiple clinical competencies, including medical knowledge (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.04–1.11); patient care (RR 1.07, 95% CI 1.04–1.10); and practice-based learning (RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.03–1.09). Conclusions  For this single institution's cohort of medical interns, increased exposure to intensive course work during the fourth year of medical school was associated with better clinical evaluations during internship.

A comparison of student performance on discipline-specific versus integrated exams in a medical school course

2013 ◽  
Vol 37 (4) ◽  
pp. 370-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew R. Thompson ◽  
Mark W. Braun ◽  
Valerie D. O'Loughlin
Keyword(s):  
Medical School ◽  
Student Performance ◽  
Bloom's Taxonomy ◽  
Integrated Instruction ◽  
Bloom’S Taxonomy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Usmle Step 1 ◽  
Usmle Step ◽  
Exam Scores ◽  
The Impact

Curricular reform is a widespread trend among medical schools. Assessing the impact that pedagogical changes have on students is a vital step in review process. This study examined how a shift from discipline-focused instruction and assessment to integrated instruction and assessment affected student performance in a second-year medical school pathology course. We investigated this by comparing pathology exam scores between students exposed to traditional discipline-specific instruction and exams (DSE) versus integrated instruction and exams (IE). Exam content was controlled, and individual questions were evaluated using a modified version of Bloom's taxonomy. Additionally, we compared United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) step 1 scores between DSE and IE groups. Our findings indicate that DSE students performed better than IE students on complete pathology exams. However, when exam content was controlled, exam scores were equivalent between groups. We also discovered that the integrated exams were composed of a significantly greater proportion of questions classified on the higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy and that IE students performed better on these questions overall. USMLE step 1 exam scores were similar between groups. The finding of a significant difference in content complexity between discipline-specific and integrated exams adds to recent literature indicating that there are a number of potential biases related to curricular comparison studies that must be considered. Future investigation involving larger sample sizes and multiple disciplines should be performed to explore this matter further.

scholarly journals Systematic Evaluation of Research Progress on Natural Language Processing in Medicine Over the Past 20 Years: Bibliometric Study on PubMed

10.2196/16816 ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. e16816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Wang ◽  
Huan Deng ◽  
Bangtao Liu ◽  
Anbin Hu ◽  
Jun Liang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Natural Language Processing ◽  
Natural Language ◽  
Medical Research ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
The United States ◽  
Columbia University ◽  
Medical Field ◽  
Number Of Publications

Background Natural language processing (NLP) is an important traditional field in computer science, but its application in medical research has faced many challenges. With the extensive digitalization of medical information globally and increasing importance of understanding and mining big data in the medical field, NLP is becoming more crucial. Objective The goal of the research was to perform a systematic review on the use of NLP in medical research with the aim of understanding the global progress on NLP research outcomes, content, methods, and study groups involved. Methods A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed database as a search platform. All published studies on the application of NLP in medicine (except biomedicine) during the 20 years between 1999 and 2018 were retrieved. The data obtained from these published studies were cleaned and structured. Excel (Microsoft Corp) and VOSviewer (Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman) were used to perform bibliometric analysis of publication trends, author orders, countries, institutions, collaboration relationships, research hot spots, diseases studied, and research methods. Results A total of 3498 articles were obtained during initial screening, and 2336 articles were found to meet the study criteria after manual screening. The number of publications increased every year, with a significant growth after 2012 (number of publications ranged from 148 to a maximum of 302 annually). The United States has occupied the leading position since the inception of the field, with the largest number of articles published. The United States contributed to 63.01% (1472/2336) of all publications, followed by France (5.44%, 127/2336) and the United Kingdom (3.51%, 82/2336). The author with the largest number of articles published was Hongfang Liu (70), while Stéphane Meystre (17) and Hua Xu (33) published the largest number of articles as the first and corresponding authors. Among the first author’s affiliation institution, Columbia University published the largest number of articles, accounting for 4.54% (106/2336) of the total. Specifically, approximately one-fifth (17.68%, 413/2336) of the articles involved research on specific diseases, and the subject areas primarily focused on mental illness (16.46%, 68/413), breast cancer (5.81%, 24/413), and pneumonia (4.12%, 17/413). Conclusions NLP is in a period of robust development in the medical field, with an average of approximately 100 publications annually. Electronic medical records were the most used research materials, but social media such as Twitter have become important research materials since 2015. Cancer (24.94%, 103/413) was the most common subject area in NLP-assisted medical research on diseases, with breast cancers (23.30%, 24/103) and lung cancers (14.56%, 15/103) accounting for the highest proportions of studies. Columbia University and the talents trained therein were the most active and prolific research forces on NLP in the medical field.

scholarly journals A survey study examining the motivations, concerns, and perspectives of medical students engaging in neurosurgical research

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 490
Author(s):  
Adriel Barrios-Anderson ◽  
Esther Wu ◽  
David D. Liu ◽  
Jameson Snead ◽  
David J. Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Students ◽  
Medical School ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Research Work ◽  
The United States ◽  
Survey Study ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Research Survey ◽  
Residency Application ◽  
Survey Responses

Background: In a competitive landscape for neurosurgical residency admission, research productivity is increasingly important. Medical school applicants to neurosurgery report high numbers of “scholarly products” as published by the National Residency Match Program. Despite increased student involvement in research and productivity, to the best of our knowledge, no previous reported studies have examined student perspectives on their involvement in neurosurgical research. Methods: For 2 consecutive years (February 2019 and February 2020), medical students (n = 55) from around the United States presented original research at the Student Neurosurgical Research Conference. Participants were administered a mixed-method survey designed to assess experiences and perspectives on engaging in neurosurgical research. Survey responses were analyzed independently by two researchers to assess for common themes and perspectives. Results: Medical students engaged in all types of research work across nearly every neurosurgical subfield with “Basic/Bench Lab work” (38.5%) and “Chart Review” (23.1%) representing the majority of projects. Students commonly cited “curiosity/interest,” and “residency application competitiveness” as main reasons for participation in research. About 66% of respondents reported experiencing anxiety/concern about research productivity “often” or “very often.” Thematic analysis revealed that sources of research-related stress were (1) having enough publications to match into residency, and (2) having enough time in medical school to engage in research. Conclusion: Medical students engaging in neurosurgical research are highly motivated students driven by scientific curiosity and pressure to prepare for competitive residency applications. Students experience anxiety due to time constraints in medical curricula and increasing demands for scholarly productivity.

The neurosurgery applicant’s “arms race”: analysis of medical student publication in the Neurosurgery Residency Match

2020 ◽  
Vol 133 (6) ◽  
pp. 1913-1921 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harsh Wadhwa ◽  
Sumedh S. Shah ◽  
Judy Shan ◽  
Justin Cheng ◽  
Angad S. Beniwal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Research ◽  
Medical School ◽  
Residency Program ◽  
Research Productivity ◽  
Basic Science ◽  
Western Us ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Number Of Publications ◽  
Top 40 ◽  
Residency Match

OBJECTIVENeurosurgery is consistently one of the most competitive specialties for resident applicants. The emphasis on research in neurosurgery has led to an increasing number of publications by applicants seeking a successful residency match. The authors sought to produce a comprehensive analysis of research produced by neurosurgical applicants and to establish baseline data of neurosurgery applicant research productivity given the increased emphasis on research output for successful residency match.METHODSA retrospective review of publication volume for all neurosurgery interns in 2009, 2011, 2014, 2016, and 2018 was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar. Missing data rates were 11% (2009), 9% (2011), and < 5% (all others). The National Resident Matching Program report “Charting Outcomes in the Match” (ChOM) was interrogated for total research products (i.e., abstracts, presentations, and publications). The publication rates of interns at top 40 programs, students from top 20 medical schools, MD/PhD applicants, and applicants based on location of residency program and medical school were compared statistically against all others.RESULTSTotal publications per neurosurgery intern (mean ± SD) based on PubMed and Google Scholar were 5.5 ± 0.6 in 2018 (1.7 ± 0.3, 2009; 2.1 ± 0.3, 2011; 2.6 ± 0.4, 2014; 3.8 ± 0.4, 2016), compared to 18.3 research products based on ChOM. In 2018, the mean numbers of publications were as follows: neurosurgery-specific publications per intern, 4.3 ± 0.6; first/last author publications, 2.1 ± 0.3; neurosurgical first/last author publications, 1.6 ± 0.2; basic science publications, 1.5 ± 0.2; and clinical research publications, 4.0 ± 0.5. Mean publication numbers among interns at top 40 programs were significantly higher than those of all other programs in every category (p < 0.001). Except for mean number of basic science publications (p = 0.1), the mean number of publications was higher for interns who attended a top 20 medical school than for those who did not (p < 0.05). Applicants with PhD degrees produced statistically more research in all categories (p < 0.05) except neurosurgery-specific (p = 0.07) and clinical research (p = 0.3). While there was no statistical difference in publication volume based on the geographical location of the residency program, students from medical schools in the Western US produced more research than all other regions (p < 0.01). Finally, research productivity did not correlate with likelihood of medical students staying at their home institution for residency.CONCLUSIONSThe authors found that the temporal trend toward increased total research products over time in neurosurgery applicants was driven mostly by increased nonindexed research (abstracts, presentations, chapters) rather than by increased peer-reviewed publications. While we also identified applicant-specific factors (MD/PhDs and applicants from the Western US) and an outcome (matching at research-focused institutions) associated with increased applicant publications, further work will be needed to determine the emphasis that programs and applicants will need to place on these publications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document