Preference Signaling: Does It Work? A MultispecialtyReview of the Data.

BACKGROUND

Preference signaling was introduced in 2021 to address application inflation and improve applicant-program alignment in residency selection. This study examined its impact on residency application data across several specialties.

METHODS

Data from the Electronic Residency Application Service and the National Resident Matching Program for presignaling (2020-2022) and postsignaling (2022-2024) eras were analyzed. Metrics, including number of applicants, applications per applicant, signals offered, and match rates, were compared using mean differences.

RESULTS

Among specialties offering 10 or more signals, ear, nose, and throat and neurosurgery had the highest reductions in the mean number of applications per applicant (-23.8% and -12.8%, respectively), whereas orthopedics and dermatology had the lowest reduction (-7.8% and -0.1%, respectively). Anesthesiology and obstetrics and gynecology both saw increases in the number of applications per applicant (+5.8% and +2.2%, respectively). Ear, nose, and throat; anesthesiology; orthopedic surgery; and neurosurgery all had a concurrent increase in match rates over the same period. Among specialties offering fewer than 10 signals, plastic surgery showed the largest reduction (-18.2%) in applications per applicant, followed by emergency medicine (-14.7%), family medicine (-7.6%), and pediatrics (-0.4%). Internal medicine and general surgery saw increases in applications per applicant (+7.2% and +9.7%, respectively). Plastic surgery, pediatrics, and family medicine all had concurrent increases in match rates over the same period.

CONCLUSIONS

Preference signaling may have reduced application inflation and improved match rates, however, shifts in application trends following the COVID-19 pandemic may have confounded these. Ultimately, time and how programs choose to use preference signaling will determine how preference signaling reshapes these application data.