Reforming the Match Process—Early Decision Plans and the Case for a Consortia Match

Wong, Brian J. F.

doi:10.1001/jamaoto.2016.1232

Cited by 17 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since the introduction of the program specific application requirement for OHNS, the number of applications per applicant has decreased . Wong, recognizing the phenomenon of hoarding interviews among a pool of highly desirable applicants, proposed an early decision plan to match these applicants early and eliminate these applicants from the general interview pool . Understanding that traditional mitigating factors are limited by the perceived competitiveness in otolaryngology, OHNS could benefit from outreach efforts to correct perceptions of competitiveness in order to encourage more interested students to apply and to reassure qualified applicants to limit hoarding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…9 Wong, recognizing the phenomenon of hoarding interviews among a pool of highly desirable applicants, proposed an early decision plan to match these applicants early and eliminate these applicants from the general interview pool. 21 Understanding that traditional mitigating factors are limited by the perceived competitiveness in otolaryngology, OHNS could benefit from outreach efforts to correct perceptions of competitiveness in order to encourage more interested students to apply and to reassure qualified applicants to limit hoarding. For example, knowing that the probability of matching in OHNS does not substantially increase after ranking 13 programs may encourage IRAs to feel safe matching without attending more interviews.…”

Section: Disadvantage For Img and Osteopathic (Do) Studentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

I dream of Gini: Quantifying inequality in otolaryngology residency interviews

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Otolaryngology applicants routinely decry conflicting interview dates because this limits the number of interviews that one can attend, despite being offered an interview. Conversely, applicants also perceive that a large number of interviews are offered to a minority of applicants. We sought to verify and quantify the inequality in distribution of interviews attended. Study Design Retrospective analysis of the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP) 2016 Charting Outcomes in the Match and Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS) historic specialty data. Methods The Gini coefficient, a commonly used indicator of economic inequality, was calculated using data from the 2016 Charting Outcomes in the Match to estimate the distribution of interviews attended. This data was compared to nine other specialties, comprising a wide range of competitiveness and specialty size. Results 26% (110 of 416) of otolaryngology applicants accounted for half (1,721 of 3,426) of all possible interview positions. The Gini coefficient ranged from 0.43 to 0.84 across 10 specialties, with a higher coefficient indicating higher inequality. The Gini coefficient among otolaryngology applicants was 0.43, indicating lower inequality than most other specialties. When including only applicants who interviewed, the Gini coefficient was 0.23. Conclusion There is an unequal distribution of interview invitations, which likely reflects the reality of asymmetry in applicant competitiveness. Otolaryngology demonstrates the greatest equality in distribution, which may stem from a greater burden of hoarding. The specialty's perceived competitiveness mitigates factors such as cost and time, essentially encouraging more people to take as many interviews as they can. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 129:627–633, 2019

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Disadvantage For Img and Osteopathic (Do) Studentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

I dream of Gini: Quantifying inequality in otolaryngology residency interviews

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, Cabrera‐Muffly et al, reported that 74% of applicants declined an interview offer due to scheduling conflicts . Wong proposed an early decision plan to match highly desirable applicants early and eliminate these applicants from the general interview pool to avoid hoarding . Other fields, such as EM, have attempted a simple regionalization effort by coordinating two Chicago program interviews to occur on back‐to‐back days and maximize applicant yield.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Otolaryngology Residency Interviewing Dates and Practices: What Should an Applicant Expect?

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives/Hypothesis Scheduling otolaryngology interviews may be a challenge for residency applicants due to overlapping interview dates. Our objective was to identify otolaryngology interview date patterns and scheduling conflicts over the past six application cycles. Study Design Retrospective review of otolaryngology online forums (http://Otomatch.com and Student Doctor Network). Methods Online threads related to residency interview dates posted during the 2012 to 2013 through 2017 to 2018 interview seasons on http://Otomatch.com were reviewed. Program directors were contacted to complete any missing data. The χ‐ goodness‐of‐fit test and the χ2 test of independence was used to compare proportions. Analysis of variance was used to compare values across years. Results Data from an average of 98 programs (99%) per year were obtained. The majority of invitations arrived late October (49%), followed by early November (37.1%). Interviews occurred primarily in December (48.4%) and January (37.5%). Programs on average scheduled 2.47 (range, 0–4) interview dates. Most interviews fell on Fridays (28.7%) and Saturdays (22.7%) (P < .0001), with an increasing trend toward interviewing on consecutive days. There was substantial overlap in interview dates, with six dates alone accounting for an average of 31.3% of all interviews in a given interview cycle. Conclusions The majority of otolaryngology interviews occur in December or January and fall on a Friday or Saturday. There is considerable overlap with the potential for scheduling conflicts. Our findings can help set expectations for applicants regarding interview invitations, as well as a strategy for scheduling interviews. Level of Evidence NA Laryngoscope, 129:2280–2285, 2019

show abstract

“…Another possibility might be to provide an incentive for applicants to apply to fewer programs. The Early Result Acceptance Program (ERAP) [28] and similar proposals [29,30] call for a two-round system with limited applications in the initial round. Applicants who do not match (or do not apply) in the first round may apply to unlimited programs in a second round.…”

Section: Marketplace Incentivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application Fever: Reviewing the Causes, Costs, and Cures for Residency Application Inflation

Carmody¹,

Rosman²,

Carlson³

2021

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past decade, the number of residency applications submitted per applicant has nearly doubled. This epidemic of "Application Fever" is expensive for applicants, burdensome for programs, and ultimately does not improve overall Match outcomes. In this review, we discuss the phenomenon of Application Fever, with a focus on contributing factors and costs of this behavior. Application Fever has its origins in the early 1990s. At that time, the number of residency applicants began to outpace the number of available positions. Because an applicant who applies to more residency programs has a greater probability of securing a residency position than an otherwise equivalent applicant who applies to fewer, "overapplication" became a dominant strategy and residency applicants began to apply to more residency programs each year. This trend was enhanced and enabled by the introduction of the Electronic Residency Application Service (ERAS). Although Application Fever is a rational decision for applicants, it imposes a substantial evaluative burden on program directors and necessitates the use of convenience screening metrics. We then briefly review potential solutions, including informational strategies, application limits, and marketplace incentives to reduce application numbers. Although a fixed cap on applications would reduce application numbers and facilitate a holistic selection process, greater transparency from residency programs regarding their selection criteria would be required to help applicants choose where to apply. To improve the residency application process for programs and applicants alike, we call upon the medical community to further study Application Fever and carefully consider solutions, including fixed application caps.

show abstract

Reforming the Match Process—Early Decision Plans and the Case for a Consortia Match

Cited by 17 publications

References 7 publications

I dream of Gini: Quantifying inequality in otolaryngology residency interviews

I dream of Gini: Quantifying inequality in otolaryngology residency interviews

Otolaryngology Residency Interviewing Dates and Practices: What Should an Applicant Expect?

Application Fever: Reviewing the Causes, Costs, and Cures for Residency Application Inflation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About