Does Medical School Geography and Ranking Influence Residency Match in Otolaryngology?

OBJECTIVE

To elucidate the associations between geographic locations, rankings, and size/funding of medical schools and residency programs among the current otolaryngology residents.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study queried otolaryngology residency program websites for relevant publicly accessible information. Location was categorized as Midwest, Northeast, South, and West. Ranking was according to Doximity (residency) and US News and World Report (medical school). Medical school and residency programs were labeled large if they had >704 students or >15 residents, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 1413 residents from 98 (89%) otolaryngology residency programs were included. Residents attending their home medical schools (18%) were equally distributed among regions ( = .845). Residents who attended medical schools in the same US regions (54%) were more likely from top-25 ( = .001) or private ( < .001) medical schools. Southern residents were most likely (64%) and Western residents were least likely (39%) from regional medical schools ( < .001), while residents from Midwest and Northeast had similar rates (54%-55%). The percentage of Midwest residents coming from regional medical schools has decreased from the 2013 to 2014 residency cycle ( = .037). Completing undergraduate school, medical school, and residency in the same region (38%) was also highest in the South (45%) and lowest in the West (25%) ( < .001). Residents at top-ranked residency programs were more likely from top-ranked ( < .001), large ( = .025), and private ( = .018) medical schools.

CONCLUSION

There exist significant associations between otolaryngology residents' medical school location, ranking, size, and funding source and their residency destination. More than half of the current otolaryngology residents attended medical school in the same geographic region, and about one-fifth have attended medical school and residency at the same institution. Future studies are warranted to evaluate how these results change as the match process evolves in the future.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

N/A.