Radiation Oncology Resident Quality by National Resident Matching Program Metrics From 2007 to 2018

Published on Feb 1, 2021in International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics5.859
· DOI :10.1016/J.IJROBP.2020.08.062
Mudit Chowdhary13
Estimated H-index: 13
(Rush University Medical Center),
Simul D. Parikh1
Estimated H-index: 1
(University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center)
+ 2 AuthorsTrevor J. Royce17
Estimated H-index: 17
(UNC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
Sources
Abstract
PURPOSE To quantify how the quality of US medical students accepted to radiation oncology (RO) training programs, as defined by National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) metrics, has changed over time. METHODS AND MATERIALS We examined NRMP data of senior US medical students matched into RO training programs from 2007 to 2018. Metrics include United States Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE) Step 1 and 2-Clinical Knowledge scores, research output, percentage with PhD, and percentage in Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA), among others. Linear regression analysis assessed the statistical significance of changes in available metrics of matched RO residents over time. The Student t test and χ2 test compared quality metrics between matched students in RO versus all other specialties. RESULTS From 2007 to 2018, the mean USMLE Step 1 and 2-Clinical Knowledge for RO residents significantly increased from 235 to 247 (1.0 point/year; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.70-1.52; P = .002) and from 237 to 253 (1.3 points/year; 95% CI, 1.27-1.62; P <.001), respectively. The mean number of research experiences and abstracts/presentations/publications increased from 3.7 to 6.1 (0.2/year; 95% CI, 0.12-0.29; P = .003) and from 6.3 to 15.6 (0.78/year; 95% CI, 0.60-1.04; P <.001), respectively. The percentage of RO residents inducted into AOA increased from 24.2% to 35.2%, whereas those with a PhD remained stable (∼21%). Matched RO residents had statistically superior metrics versus all other specialties for USMLE Step 1 scores (mean +13.5 points; 95% CI, 7.26-19.67; P <.001), research experience (mean +2.04; 95% CI, 1.11-2.97; P <.001), abstracts/presentations/publications (mean +6.80; 95% CI, 3.38-10.22; P = .001), percentage with a PhD (22.2% vs 4.1%; P <.001), and percentage in AOA (29.5% vs 15.8%; P <.001). CONCLUSIONS RO resident quality, defined by routinely reported NRMP metrics, increased from 2007 to 2018. Furthermore, RO resident quality is significantly higher than in all other specialties combined for most metrics. Whether the recent decline in medical student interest in RO will correlate with reduced NRMP quality metrics is unknown.
📖 Papers frequently viewed together
20211.82Pm&r
5 Authors (Deanna Claus, ..., Adele Meron)
21 Citations
5 Citations
References11
Newest
#1Cedric Lefebvre (Wake Forest University)H-Index: 13
#2Nicholas Hartman (Wake Forest University)H-Index: 7
Last. David E. Manthey (Wake Forest University)H-Index: 19
view all 4 authors...
Background Although the concept of medical specialty competitiveness may seem intuitive, there are very little existing empirical data on the determinants of specialty competitiveness in USA. An understanding of the determinants of specialty competitiveness may inform career choices among students and their advisors. Specialty competitiveness correlates with availability and appeal. Methods This narrative review examines 2019 National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) data and the existing litera...
1 CitationsSource
#1Salomeh M. Salari (University Hospitals of Cleveland)H-Index: 1
#1Salomeh Salari (Harvard University)H-Index: 1
Last. Francis DengH-Index: 10
view all 2 authors...
: Score reporting for the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1 will change from a 3-digit number to pass/fail as soon as January 1, 2022. The shift is meant to prevent residency program directors from using Step 1 scores to select applicants for interviews, a purpose for which the exam was not designed. Using Step 1 scores in this way also has put undue stress on medical students applying to residency. However, the score reporting change represents only one stepping stone toward an...
11 CitationsSource
#1Mudit Chowdhary (Rush University Medical Center)H-Index: 13
#2Neilayan Sen (Rush University Medical Center)H-Index: 8
Last. Trevor J. Royce (UNC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)H-Index: 17
view all 7 authors...
Abstract Purpose The size and growth of US radiation oncology (RO) residency positions has important implications for the RO workforce. There are no data on residency growth by geographic region, major urban centers, and program size. We aim to fill this gap. Methods and Materials A database of all RO programs & positions from 2003-2018 was created using National Resident Matching Program data. Programs were categorized by US Census Bureau geographic region, major metropolitan location (top 10 c...
7 CitationsSource
#1Austin J. SimH-Index: 3
#2A.M. Laucis (UM: University of Michigan)H-Index: 2
Last. Rahul D. Tendulkar (Cleveland Clinic)H-Index: 21
view all 6 authors...
2 CitationsSource
Objective Measures Needed A large majority of U.S. residency program directors do not agree with changing scoring on the USMLE Step 1 exam to pass/fail, and they believe that scores on the Step 2 C...
34 CitationsSource
#1Christian Fernandez (Thomas Jefferson University)H-Index: 35
#2Bernard L. Lopez (Thomas Jefferson University)H-Index: 45
Last. Robert B. Den (Thomas Jefferson University)H-Index: 42
view all 5 authors...
Abstract Purpose Many radiation oncology programs use Step 1 score metrics as a surrogate for intelligence and success to screen applicants. The impact of this practice on radiation oncology applicant pool diversity is unknown. Methods and Materials Electronic Residency Application Service applications submitted to our institution between 2015 and 2018 match cycles were reviewed. Sex, age, race/ethnicity, and Step 1 scores were collected. Groupings by characteristics were sex (female vs male), a...
10 CitationsSource
#1Jenna M. Kahn (VCU: Virginia Commonwealth University)H-Index: 12
#2Chelain R. Goodman (NU: Northwestern University)H-Index: 13
Last. Lauren E. Colbert (University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center)H-Index: 13
view all 9 authors...
25 CitationsSource
#1Ankit Agarwal (UNC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)H-Index: 12
#2Trevor J. Royce (UNC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)H-Index: 17
Last. Mudit Chowdhary (Rush University Medical Center)H-Index: 13
view all 4 authors...
12 CitationsSource
#1Robert J. Amdur (UF: University of Florida)H-Index: 63
#2W. Robert Lee (Duke University)H-Index: 39
10 CitationsSource
#1Paul E. WallnerH-Index: 17
#2Lisa A. Kachnic (Vandy: Vanderbilt University)H-Index: 54
Last. Anthony M. GerdemanH-Index: 5
view all 3 authors...
4 CitationsSource
Cited By4
Newest
#1Chelain R. Goodman (University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center)H-Index: 1
#1Chelain R. Goodman (University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center)H-Index: 13
Last. Shauna R. Campbell (Cleveland Clinic)H-Index: 4
view all 13 authors...
Abstract Purpose To report trends in the number and types of applicants and matched trainees to radiation oncology in comparison to other specialties participating in the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) between 2010-2020. Methods Data from the NRMP and Electronic Residency Application System (ERAS) were obtained for 18 medical specialties between 2010-2020. Number and type of applicants and matched trainees relative to available positions in the NRMP and Supplemental Offer and Acceptan...
3 CitationsSource
#1Gavin P. Jones (UK: University of Kentucky)H-Index: 2
#2Trevor J. Royce (UNC: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)H-Index: 17
Last. Mudit Chowdhary (Rush University Medical Center)H-Index: 13
view all 3 authors...
1 CitationsSource
#1April Vassantachart (LAC+USC Medical Center)H-Index: 1
#2Lindsay Hwang (LAC+USC Medical Center)H-Index: 1
Last. Richard Jennelle (LAC+USC Medical Center)H-Index: 1
view all 4 authors...
Abstract Purpose Radiation oncology has been facing an evolving crisis in recruitment for several years, and the events of 2020 to 2021 will certainly add to that crisis with the urgency of addressing systemic racial injustice amid a global pandemic. The purpose of this study is to examine applicant data to gain insight on residency match trends and evaluate these findings within the backdrop of a novel match year. Methods and Materials National Residency Matching Program (NRMP) data between 200...
1 CitationsSource
Radiation oncology (RO) teaching in undergraduate medical education (UME) is lacking worldwide with potentially detrimental effects on medical student career choices and patient care. The objective of this scoping review is to examine the extent of published literature describing RO educational and career-planning interventions in UME. Online databases were searched from respective dates of inception to June 2020 for articles that reported outcomes from RO educational and career-planning interve...
Source