MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791159023 · doi:10.1177/2292550317749507

How Competitive Is Plastic Surgery? An Analysis of the Canadian and American Residency Match

2018· article· en· W2791159023 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenuePlastic Surgery · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiversity and Career in Medicine
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Plastic surgery (PS) is considered to be one of the most competitive specialties. As a result, some students are discouraged from applying, reducing the overall number of PS candidates. Still, much of what we know of the match is based in conjecture. Objective: To examine the Canadian PS match data from 1997 to 2016. To our knowledge, this is the first long-term analysis of the Canadian PS residency match. Method: We examined the Canadian Residency Matching Service reports from 1997 to 2016, extracting key match statistics, including available positions, number of applicants, positions filled, positions unfilled, and gender-specific match results. To examine competitiveness, the ratio of total applicants per quota per year (CR) and the ratio of applicants who chose PS as their first-choice specialty per quota per year were calculated (FC-CR). The National Residency Matching Program data were used to assess the American integrated PS match over the past decade and served as a comparison. Results: The CR of Canadian PS programs declined over the last 20 years ( P < .001), indicating fewer applicants applied to the program per available position. Similarly, the FC-CR also declined over the last 20 years ( P < .001). The number of females matching to their first-choice discipline of PS increased from 1997 ( P < .001). There was no significant change in the number of males matching to their first-choice discipline of PS ( P = .15). There was no significant change in the competitiveness (CR) of the American integrated PS match over the last decade ( P = 0.087). Conclusion: Encouragingly, today PS has more training positions and more female residents; yet, the overall number of applicants has remained relatively static over the past 20 years. This analysis serves as a valuable reference for PS programs and should assist in developing strategies to encourage the best applicants to apply.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.449
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it