Success in the Pediatric Surgery Match: A survey of the 2010 applicant pool

Alana Beres, Robert Baird, Pramod S. Puligandla

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

22 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background/Purpose: Traditionally, basic science research and publication record have led to a successful Pediatric Surgery Match. With changing applicant research backgrounds, we evaluated if these or other factors still apply. Methods: A SurveyMonkey questionnaire was distributed to 57 applicants with known contact information. We assessed demographic/financial data, application details and match results, research experience, publications, presence of a pediatric surgery fellowship at their home program, and applicant ranking criteria. Results: Forty-three (75%) responses were received. Twenty-five candidates matched, 12 (48%) to 1 of their first 3 choices. The median number of programs applied to was similar for matched and unmatched candidates (30), but matched candidates attended more interviews (21 vs 14.5; P = .03). Matched applicants had more publications (9.5 vs 5.1; P = .03), although research experience was similar to unmatched candidates. Research focus for matched vs total applicants included basic science (5 vs 12), clinical (4 vs 6), and both (11 vs 16). Five candidates matched without research experience. Ten (40%) applicants matched to institutions where they completed residency/research/ fellowship training. Twelve (49%) applicants matched from programs without a fellowship program. Conclusion: A strong publication record remains important, although clinical research is being valued more. Candidates from nonfellowship programs can be successful. This information may be useful to mentor future applicants and lays the foundation for a critical evaluation of the match process.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)957-961
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Pediatric Surgery
Volume46
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2011

Fingerprint

Pediatrics
Research
Publications
Mentors
Surveys and Questionnaires
Internship and Residency
Demography
Interviews

Keywords

  • Match application
  • Pediatric Surgery Match
  • Ranking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pediatrics, Perinatology, and Child Health
  • Surgery

Cite this

Success in the Pediatric Surgery Match : A survey of the 2010 applicant pool. / Beres, Alana; Baird, Robert; Puligandla, Pramod S.

In: Journal of Pediatric Surgery, Vol. 46, No. 5, 01.05.2011, p. 957-961.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Beres, Alana ; Baird, Robert ; Puligandla, Pramod S. / Success in the Pediatric Surgery Match : A survey of the 2010 applicant pool. In: Journal of Pediatric Surgery. 2011 ; Vol. 46, No. 5. pp. 957-961.
@article{bb05125f7f434bb089c85128286434a9,
title = "Success in the Pediatric Surgery Match: A survey of the 2010 applicant pool",
abstract = "Background/Purpose: Traditionally, basic science research and publication record have led to a successful Pediatric Surgery Match. With changing applicant research backgrounds, we evaluated if these or other factors still apply. Methods: A SurveyMonkey questionnaire was distributed to 57 applicants with known contact information. We assessed demographic/financial data, application details and match results, research experience, publications, presence of a pediatric surgery fellowship at their home program, and applicant ranking criteria. Results: Forty-three (75{\%}) responses were received. Twenty-five candidates matched, 12 (48{\%}) to 1 of their first 3 choices. The median number of programs applied to was similar for matched and unmatched candidates (30), but matched candidates attended more interviews (21 vs 14.5; P = .03). Matched applicants had more publications (9.5 vs 5.1; P = .03), although research experience was similar to unmatched candidates. Research focus for matched vs total applicants included basic science (5 vs 12), clinical (4 vs 6), and both (11 vs 16). Five candidates matched without research experience. Ten (40{\%}) applicants matched to institutions where they completed residency/research/ fellowship training. Twelve (49{\%}) applicants matched from programs without a fellowship program. Conclusion: A strong publication record remains important, although clinical research is being valued more. Candidates from nonfellowship programs can be successful. This information may be useful to mentor future applicants and lays the foundation for a critical evaluation of the match process.",
keywords = "Match application, Pediatric Surgery Match, Ranking",
author = "Alana Beres and Robert Baird and Puligandla, {Pramod S.}",
year = "2011",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2011.02.030",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "957--961",
journal = "Journal of Pediatric Surgery",
issn = "0022-3468",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Success in the Pediatric Surgery Match

T2 - A survey of the 2010 applicant pool

AU - Beres, Alana

AU - Baird, Robert

AU - Puligandla, Pramod S.

PY - 2011/5/1

Y1 - 2011/5/1

N2 - Background/Purpose: Traditionally, basic science research and publication record have led to a successful Pediatric Surgery Match. With changing applicant research backgrounds, we evaluated if these or other factors still apply. Methods: A SurveyMonkey questionnaire was distributed to 57 applicants with known contact information. We assessed demographic/financial data, application details and match results, research experience, publications, presence of a pediatric surgery fellowship at their home program, and applicant ranking criteria. Results: Forty-three (75%) responses were received. Twenty-five candidates matched, 12 (48%) to 1 of their first 3 choices. The median number of programs applied to was similar for matched and unmatched candidates (30), but matched candidates attended more interviews (21 vs 14.5; P = .03). Matched applicants had more publications (9.5 vs 5.1; P = .03), although research experience was similar to unmatched candidates. Research focus for matched vs total applicants included basic science (5 vs 12), clinical (4 vs 6), and both (11 vs 16). Five candidates matched without research experience. Ten (40%) applicants matched to institutions where they completed residency/research/ fellowship training. Twelve (49%) applicants matched from programs without a fellowship program. Conclusion: A strong publication record remains important, although clinical research is being valued more. Candidates from nonfellowship programs can be successful. This information may be useful to mentor future applicants and lays the foundation for a critical evaluation of the match process.

AB - Background/Purpose: Traditionally, basic science research and publication record have led to a successful Pediatric Surgery Match. With changing applicant research backgrounds, we evaluated if these or other factors still apply. Methods: A SurveyMonkey questionnaire was distributed to 57 applicants with known contact information. We assessed demographic/financial data, application details and match results, research experience, publications, presence of a pediatric surgery fellowship at their home program, and applicant ranking criteria. Results: Forty-three (75%) responses were received. Twenty-five candidates matched, 12 (48%) to 1 of their first 3 choices. The median number of programs applied to was similar for matched and unmatched candidates (30), but matched candidates attended more interviews (21 vs 14.5; P = .03). Matched applicants had more publications (9.5 vs 5.1; P = .03), although research experience was similar to unmatched candidates. Research focus for matched vs total applicants included basic science (5 vs 12), clinical (4 vs 6), and both (11 vs 16). Five candidates matched without research experience. Ten (40%) applicants matched to institutions where they completed residency/research/ fellowship training. Twelve (49%) applicants matched from programs without a fellowship program. Conclusion: A strong publication record remains important, although clinical research is being valued more. Candidates from nonfellowship programs can be successful. This information may be useful to mentor future applicants and lays the foundation for a critical evaluation of the match process.

KW - Match application

KW - Pediatric Surgery Match

KW - Ranking

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79957555078&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79957555078&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2011.02.030

DO - 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2011.02.030

M3 - Article

C2 - 21616260

AN - SCOPUS:79957555078

VL - 46

SP - 957

EP - 961

JO - Journal of Pediatric Surgery

JF - Journal of Pediatric Surgery

SN - 0022-3468

IS - 5

ER -