15. Diversity Scholarships for Plastic Surgery Sub-Internships: A National Review of US Residency Programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Away rotations are essential for increasing an applicants’ chances of matching to a plastic surgery program. Financial constraints exist for students attempting to complete these month-long subinternships. Residency programs have developed monetary initiatives for students underrepresented in medicine (URiM). Our team sought to 1) provide a centralized resource for URiM students seeking subinternships with funded opportunities and 2) investigate the relationship between diversity scholarships availability and doximity rankings as well as geographic program location. Methods: A cross sectional analysis of URiM scholarships opportunities offered by US integrated plastic surgery programs (n=91) between July and September 2023. The study utilized residency and program web domains. Investigators collected information on the monetary value of scholarship, eligibility criteria, required application documents, and if interviews were guaranteed. In addition to descriptive statistics, inferential data analysis was conducted to compare programs with scholarships to those without as well as further investigation of whether programs’ geographic region or Doximity ranking played a role in likelihood of scholarship existence. Results: The study found that approximately 52.7% (n=48) of programs have in place monetary support for underrepresented visiting medical students (e.g. stipend or reimbursement). (Table 1) The average monetary support was $1670. Most programs defined eligibility of URiM status in a statement similar to that of the AAMC’s definition. Programs typically catered only to 4th year students and required USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 scores when available. Number of LOR required ranged from zero to three, and the median number of essays ranged was one. A univariate test demonstrated that programs with lower rankings in both reputation and research were less likely to have scholarship available than higher ranking programs (p-value 0.002; p-value 0.02 respectively). (Table 2) Moreover, programs located in the Midwest regions were 3.5 times more likely to have a diversity scholarship available (p-value 0.034). In our multivariate analysis, reputation ranking, and geographic region remained significant. (Table 3) A Pearson’s Chi square test showed the greatest proportions of scholarships among geographically similar programs to be in the Midwest (70%), however, not statistically significant). (Table 4 and Fig 4) Conclusion: This study provides a centralized resource for URiM students interested in completing aways. Of interest, these scholarships tend to be offered more at Midwest programs, possibly indicating an increased recruiting effort of underrepresented students. Further investigation into how residency programs developed and funded these scholarship opportunities would be of much benefit. These insights could help guide other programs in the development of their own visiting medical student scholarships for URiM applicants.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".