目标:使用德克萨斯之星(寻求申请居住权的透明度),我们的目的是1)检查综合整形外科住院医师计划匹配成功的预测因子,2)评估该工具的可靠性.
方法:纳入了对146所参与医学院的2021年至2023年间整形外科住院医师申请人自我报告的全国数据的回顾性分析。使用卡方检验对匹配和不匹配的申请人进行了比较分析,t检验,和逻辑回归模型。参考NRMP数据和文献以确定可靠性。
结果:在209份整形外科住院医师申请中,147人匹配(70.3%),62人不匹配(29.7%)。美国医学执照考试(USMLE)第1步和第2步的平均分数分别为248和257。在匹配和不匹配的队列之间,在AlphaOmegaAlpha(AOA)状态中没有观察到显着差异,金人文主义荣誉协会(GHHS)地位,研究经验/演示文稿的平均数量,志愿者经历,领导职务,和应用的程序。匹配的重要预测因素包括研究年份(OR2.07,CI0.99-4.34,p=0.052),8+同行评审出版物(OR2.29,CI1.22-4.30,p=0.009),地理联系(p=0.02),参加了13次访谈(OR2.94,CI1.56-5.51,p<0.001)。这些发现与目前的文献和NRMP一致。在分析了用户对潜在申请人的一般建议的定性自由文本答复后,子实习,连接,采访,研究,质量推荐信,家庭优势,和指导是由匹配和不匹配的队列提供的建议的突出主题。
结论:德州之星是一个足智多谋、可靠的工具。我们得出的结论是,研究年份和地理联系是整形外科匹配的有力预测因素。然而,更多因素(例如,申请者家庭医学院,子实习人数,和导师的数量)应考虑在确定自己的竞争力时做出明智的决定,轮换和居住计划。
OBJECTIVE: Using Texas STAR (seeking transparency in application to residency), we aimed to 1) examine predictors of matching success in
integrated plastic surgery residency programs and 2) assess the reliability of the tool.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of self-reported nationwide data of plastic surgery residency applicants between 2021 and 2023 across 146 participating medical schools were included. A comparison analysis was performed between matched and unmatched applicants using chi-squared tests, t-tests, and logistic regression models. NRMP data and literature were referenced to determine reliability.
RESULTS: Of the 209 plastic surgery resident applications, 147 matched (70.3%) and 62 went unmatched (29.7%). Average United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 and 2 scores were 248 and 257, respectively. Between matched and unmatched cohorts, no significant differences were observed in Alpha Omega Alpha (AOA) status, Gold Humanism Honor Society (GHHS) status, mean number of research experiences/presentations, volunteer experiences, leadership positions, and programs applied. Significant predictors of matching included taking a research year (OR 2.07, CI 0.99-4.34, p= 0.052), 8+ peer-reviewed publications (OR 2.29, CI 1.22-4.30, p = 0.009), geographic connection (p = 0.02), and 13+ interviews attended (OR 2.94, CI 1.56 -5.51, p < 0.001). These findings are consistent with current literature and the NRMP. Upon analysis of the qualitative free text responses on general recommendations for prospective applicants by users, subinternships, connections, interviews, research, letter of recommendation quality, home advantage, and mentorship were prominent themes of advice provided by both matched and unmatched cohorts.
CONCLUSIONS: Texas STAR is a resourceful and reliable tool. We conclude that a research year and geographic connections are strong predictors of matching in plastic surgery. However, more factors (e.g., applicants\' home medical school, number of sub internships, and number of mentors) should be considered to make a well-informed decision on determining their own competitiveness, away rotations and residency programs.