Andriole Dorothy A, Jeffe Donna B, Klingensmith Mary
Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110, USA.
Curr Surg. 2006 Mar-Apr;63(2):145-50. doi: 10.1016/j.cursur.2005.12.003.
The authors sought to compare categorical general surgery applicants with applicants in other specialties regarding their final specialty-choice ranking for residency positions.
The authors analyzed the 2004-match year applicant-pool data from the Electronic Residency Application Service and Common Application Service as well as rank-list data from the National Resident Matching Program (NRMP), the Urology Match Program, and the San Francisco Matching Program for 20 different specialties. Two-tailed chi-square tests measured differences between the proportions of applicants who ultimately ranked programs in categorical general surgery and each of 19 other specialties and between the proportions of U.S. students who ranked categorical general surgery and each of 19 other specialties as a non-preferred choice. A Bonferroni-adjusted alpha was set at 0.0013 to reduce the likelihood of a type I error.
The proportion of applicants ranking each specialty ranged from 42% (786/1859) in pathology to 91% (282/31l) in neurological surgery. The proportion of categorical general surgery applicants ranking categorical general surgery programs was 51% (2004/3900), which was significantly lower than the proportions ranking 12 of 19 other specialties (each p < 0.001). Of the 2004 categorical general surgery applicants ranking categorical general surgery programs, 278 (278/2004, 14%) ranked categorical general surgery as a non-preferred specialty. Among 1230 U.S. students ranking categorical general surgery programs, 144 (12%) did so as a non-preferred specialty-a proportion significantly higher compared with U.S. students ranking 15 of 19 other specialties as non-preferred (each p < 0.001).
In 2004, the categorical general surgery applicant pool was relatively uncommitted to the specialty of general surgery. The number of applicants ranking categorical general surgery as a non-preferred specialty was likely even higher than these data indicate, as unmatched applicants in non-NRMP matches who then ranked categorical general surgery programs in the NRMP were tabulated by the NRMP as having ranked categorical general surgery as their preferred specialty.
作者试图比较普通外科分类申请人与其他专业申请人在住院医师职位最终专业选择排名方面的情况。
作者分析了2004年电子住院医师申请服务和通用申请服务的申请人池数据，以及来自国家住院医师匹配计划（NRMP）、泌尿外科匹配计划和旧金山匹配计划的20个不同专业的排名列表数据。双尾卡方检验测量了最终将普通外科分类项目排在前的申请人比例与其他19个专业中每个专业的申请人比例之间的差异，以及将普通外科分类项目作为非首选专业排名的美国学生比例与将其他19个专业中每个专业作为非首选专业排名的美国学生比例之间的差异。设定Bonferroni校正后的α为0.0013，以降低I型错误的可能性。
将每个专业列为首选的申请人比例从病理学的42%（786/1859）到神经外科的91%（282/311）不等。将普通外科分类项目列为首选的普通外科分类申请人比例为51%（2004/3900），显著低于将其他19个专业中的12个列为首选的比例（每个p<0.001）。在将普通外科分类项目列为首选的2004名普通外科分类申请人中，278人（278/2004，14%）将普通外科分类项目作为非首选专业。在将普通外科分类项目列为首选的1230名美国学生中，144人（12%）将其作为非首选专业——这一比例显著高于将其他19个专业中的15个作为非首选专业排名的美国学生比例（每个p<0.001）。
2004年，普通外科分类申请人池对普通外科专业的忠诚度相对较低。将普通外科分类项目作为非首选专业排名的申请人数量可能甚至高于这些数据所显示的，因为非NRMP匹配中未匹配的申请人随后在NRMP中将普通外科分类项目列为首选，NRMP将其列为将普通外科分类项目作为首选专业排名。
