Residency Placement Fever: Is It Time for a Reevaluation?
Residency Placement Fever: Is It Time for a Reevaluation?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1097/acm.0000000000001468
复制
发表时间：
2017-07-01
影响因子：
7.4
通讯作者：
Adashi, Eli Y.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Gruppuso, Philip A.;Adashi, Eli Y.
从本科生医学教育向研究生医学教育(GME)的过渡涉及一个植根于医学院最后一年的过程。学生通过电子常驻申请服务平台提交申请，与他们收到邀请的常驻培训(即GME)计划进行面试，并生成按等级排序的首选项列表。国家居民匹配计划协调申请者和项目排名，着眼于匹配学生和GME项目。这一过程有效地服务了几代毕业的医学生。然而，在过去的几十年里，居留安置过程得到了加强，每个学生提交的申请数量和接受和参加的面试数量都在不可避免地增加。作者认为，这一趋势对GME项目的申请者和部门都有不利的影响。在同行评议的文献中，关于加强居住地安置过程的后果和好处的相关信息很少。作者阐述了可能导致居住地安置过程的强度和数据相对匮乏的因素。他们提出了扭转当前趋势的方法，并得出结论，任何对这一过程的重新评估都必须包括结果数据的生成，以使医学教育工作者有机会以循证的方式探索变化。
The transition from undergraduate medical education to graduate medical education (GME) involves a process rooted in the final year of medical school. Students file applications through the Electronic Residency Application Service platform, interview with residency training (i.e., GME) programs from which they have received invitations, and generate a rankordered preference list. The National Resident Matching Program reconciles applicant and program rank lists with an eye towards matching students and GME programs. This process has effectively served generations of graduating medical students. However, the past several decades have seen an intensification of the residency placement process that is exemplified by an inexorable increase in the number of applications filed and number of interviews accepted and attended by each student. The authors contend that this trend has untoward effects on both applicants and departments that are home to GME programs. Relevant information in the peer-reviewed literature on the consequences and benefits of the intensification of the residency placement process is scant. The authors address factors that may contribute to the intensity of the residency placement process and the relative paucity of data. They propose approaches to reverse current trends, and conclude that any reevaluation of the process will have to include the generation of outcome data to afford medical educators the opportunity to explore changes in an evidence-based manner.