Analyzing trends in obstetrics and gynecology fellowship training over the last decade using the normalized competitive index.
National Resident Match Program
competitive
fellowship
match
normalized competitive index
specialty
Journal
AJOG global reports
ISSN: 2666-5778
Titre abrégé: AJOG Glob Rep
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101777907
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2022
Nov 2022
Historique:
entrez:
27
10
2022
pubmed:
28
10
2022
medline:
28
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The objective and relative competitiveness of obstetrical and gynecologic subspecialty training programs remain understudied. Traditional metrics, such as match rate or program fill rate, fail to standardize the application environment. This limits their applicability when examining demographic trends or when comparing data between different fellowship matches. The normalized competitive index was introduced to serve as a comprehensive metric of competitiveness by incorporating disparate indicators and normalizing to enable more detailed analyses. This study aimed to analyze trends in the competitiveness across obstetrical and gynecologic subspecialty fellowship matches during the last decade. The results and data reports from the National Resident Match Program fellowship for 2010 to 2019 were used to collect data on multiple metrics of competitiveness for 6 obstetrical and gynecologic subspecialties. These data were used to determine the normalized competitive index. Subanalyses were conducted to identify trends over the last decade. Among fellowship programs in obstetrics and gynecology, the overall specialty match rate was 67.6%. The overall specialty program fill rate was 95.7%. According to the normalized competitive index metric, minimally invasive gynecologic surgery was the most competitive fellowship match (normalized competitive index=1.31; The normalized competitive index offers trainees a more quantitative understanding of the fellowship application environment. By incorporating multiple metrics and normalizing the result, it uniquely enables comparison between the subspecialty matches and the match process over time. The same standardization offers the potential for future comparisons of competitiveness within a single subspecialty match based on geographic region, applicant demographics, and other important determinants of a diverse and vibrant training environment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The objective and relative competitiveness of obstetrical and gynecologic subspecialty training programs remain understudied. Traditional metrics, such as match rate or program fill rate, fail to standardize the application environment. This limits their applicability when examining demographic trends or when comparing data between different fellowship matches. The normalized competitive index was introduced to serve as a comprehensive metric of competitiveness by incorporating disparate indicators and normalizing to enable more detailed analyses.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to analyze trends in the competitiveness across obstetrical and gynecologic subspecialty fellowship matches during the last decade.
STUDY DESIGN
METHODS
The results and data reports from the National Resident Match Program fellowship for 2010 to 2019 were used to collect data on multiple metrics of competitiveness for 6 obstetrical and gynecologic subspecialties. These data were used to determine the normalized competitive index. Subanalyses were conducted to identify trends over the last decade.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Among fellowship programs in obstetrics and gynecology, the overall specialty match rate was 67.6%. The overall specialty program fill rate was 95.7%. According to the normalized competitive index metric, minimally invasive gynecologic surgery was the most competitive fellowship match (normalized competitive index=1.31;
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The normalized competitive index offers trainees a more quantitative understanding of the fellowship application environment. By incorporating multiple metrics and normalizing the result, it uniquely enables comparison between the subspecialty matches and the match process over time. The same standardization offers the potential for future comparisons of competitiveness within a single subspecialty match based on geographic region, applicant demographics, and other important determinants of a diverse and vibrant training environment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36299713
doi: 10.1016/j.xagr.2022.100107
pii: S2666-5778(22)00056-9
pmc: PMC9587363
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
100107Références
Int Urogynecol J. 2010 Mar;21(3):349-52
pubmed: 19921081
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2020 Jul - Aug;27(5):1070-1075
pubmed: 31401264
Fertil Steril. 2009 May;91(5):1636-41
pubmed: 18177865
Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Sep;120(3):619-25
pubmed: 22914472
J Surg Educ. 2020 Jan - Feb;77(1):74-81
pubmed: 31422019
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Feb;214(2):243-246
pubmed: 26582169
Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2015 Mar 17;12:55-60
pubmed: 26076160
Conn Med. 2009 Mar;73(3):165-70
pubmed: 19353991
J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2004 Nov;16(5):259-63
pubmed: 15621540
Female Pelvic Med Reconstr Surg. 2010 Mar;16(2):103-11
pubmed: 22453157
Gynecol Oncol Rep. 2019 Oct 24;30:100504
pubmed: 31867429
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2018 Sep - Oct;25(6):1060-1064
pubmed: 29454146
J Grad Med Educ. 2018 Dec;10(6):665-670
pubmed: 30619524
Obstet Gynecol. 2000 Feb;95(2):312-4
pubmed: 10674601
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014 Jun;210(6):567.e1-8
pubmed: 24412118