Characteristics of Emergency Medicine Residency Programs With Unfilled Positions in the 2023 Match
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: The unprecedented number of unfilled emergency medicine post-graduate year 1 (PGY-1) residency positions in the 2023 National Resident Matching Program shocked the emergency medicine community. This study investigates the association between emergency medicine program characteristics and the likelihood of unfilled positions in the 2023 Match. METHODS: This cross-sectional, observational study examined 2023 National Resident Matching Program data, focusing on program type, length, location, size, proximity to other programs, previous American Osteopathic Association (AOA) accreditation, first accreditation year, and emergency department ownership structure. We constructed a generalized linear mixed model with a logistic linking function to determine predictors of unfilled positions. RESULTS: A total of 554 of 3,010 (18.4%) PGY-1 positions at 131 of 276 (47%) emergency medicine programs went unfilled in the 2023 Match. In our model, predictors included having unfilled positions in the 2022 Match (odds ratio [OR] 48.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 21.04 to 110.15), smaller program size (less than 8 residents, OR 18.39, 95% CI 3.90 to 86.66; 8 to 10 residents, OR 6.29, 95% CI 1.50 to 26.28; 11 to 13 residents, OR 5.88, 95% CI 1.55 to 22.32), located in the Mid Atlantic (OR 14.03, 95% CI 2.56 to 77.04) area, prior AOA accreditation (OR 10.13, 95% CI 2.82 to 36.36), located in the East North Central (OR 6.94, 95% CI 1.25 to 38.47) area, and corporate ownership structure (OR 3.21, 95% CI 1.06 to 9.72). CONCLUSION: Our study identified 6 characteristics associated with unfilled emergency medicine residency positions in the 2023 Match. These findings may be used to guide student advising and inform decisions by residency programs, hospitals, and national organizations to address the complexities of residency recruitment and implications for the emergency medicine workforce.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".